Guest Post: The Final Form of Human Government

Tyler Durden's picture

The next (to last) in a continuing series (most recently: The End of History).  

Submitted by Free Radical

The Final Form of Human Government

Man is not only the most individual being on earth; he is also the most social being.
 – Mikhail Bakunin

As Donne reminds us, No man is an island, at least if he attains to the order, the harmony – that “pleasing combination of the elements” – for which he naturally yearns.  Alone against the elements, man is as nothing, scratching out an existence unfit for his kind and indeed destructive of it, selfless because, in having no others with whom to associate, no true self exists. But in that convivium – that “living together” – a self emerges, or at least the reflection of a self, into which he gazes and through which he begins not only to act but to act human, the goal of which is always the satisfaction of the acting man’s desires. And that, as we have said, is the source and sustenance of the social enterprise: 

Society is concerted action, cooperation … the outcome of conscious and purposeful behavior. … Individual man is born into a socially organized environment. In this sense alone we may accept the saying that society is – logically and historically – antecedent to the individual. In every other sense this dictum is either empty or nonsensical. The individual lives and acts within society. But society is nothing but the combination of individuals for cooperative effort.

In seeing that it was out of this cooperative effort that civil society’s Twin Pillars – money and law – evolved, it is clear that in order for “the final form of human government” to indeed be final (inasmuch as humanity remains subject to material scarcity and thus to the demands of homo economicus), gold and the golden rule must be put back on their foundations. They must be returned to their rightful owners, that is, leaving us with one last question so far as societal governance is concerned. For in debunking the state, including and especially the “democratic” state, it would appear that we have debunked democracy as well, and that the collapse of the democratic state therefore means the death of democracy. On the contrary, however, the collapse of the democratic state will mean the birth of genuine democracy. For as the mechanism whose modus operandi is compulsion and coercion is displaced by the organism whose modus vivendi is voluntary cooperation, democracy in the form of majority rule will give way to democracy in the form of individual rule. That is, the individual, as a sovereign unto himself, will rule over himself, the devolutionary process rendering the fraud of representative/ constitutional democracy null and void amid the flowering of a participatory, and thus truly social, democracy rooted in a negative – i.e., non-interventionist – rule of law. 

It will be market democracy, in other words, and while everyone will not have the same number of “votes” – i.e., the same amount of purchasing power – the tendency will be in this direction, as the enormous, state-induced disparities between rich and poor narrow over time (even as vastly more wealth is created) and society moves toward a state of equilibrium that is steady not because it doesn’t change but because it changes steadily, spontaneously generating more and more order.

Will it be utopia? Yes, and emphatically so, for the simple reason that “Utopianism is compatible with everything but determinism,”  which is to say, with everything but the state. And as the state atrophies, we can therefore expect utopia – “nowhere” – to appear first here, then there, in this form and that, at once experimental and experiential, until it is everywhere, evolving as one, under the direction of no one and everyone at the same time, and doing so, again, without limit:

Since man is always acting, he must always be engaged in trying to attain the greatest height on his value scale, whatever the type of choice under consideration. There must always be room for improvement in his value scale; otherwise all of man’s wants would be perfectly satisfied, and action would disappear. Since this cannot be the case, it means that there is always open to each actor the prospect of improving his lot, of attaining a value higher than he is giving up, i.e., of making a psychic profit.”

How much “psychic profit” is humanity capable of generating? If there “must always be room for improvement in his value scale,” how much room can man, in that convivium, make? Given that he does not live by bread alone, how far beyond bread can man live? How far beyond the margin of subsistence, in other words, can he in fact go?

We conclude this series with an answer that could well be as probable as it is seemingly impossible, the title of which we withhold with a wink, a nod, and profound thanks for the service that this extraordinary site provides to the cause of human freedom and thus to humanity itself.

You go, Tyler.


i Robert Nisbet, The Quest for Community: A Study in the Ethics of Order and Freedom, ICS Press, 1990 (Oxford University, 1953), pp. 90 and 91.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Yen Cross's picture

 Humans can't govern them selves (pun intended) SINGULARITY?  I like my Maid with a fleshy mouth.

JW n FL's picture

what the fuck does this post have to do with silver?

utopia trading silver, and equal distribution of silver to all?

same shit different day.. stop posting your shit at the top of every fucking post.


Yen Cross's picture

 Absolutely nothing! Thanks JW n FL.

ibjamming's picture

SOME "humans" can't govern themselves.  Seems the darker you are...the shittier you are at it.

jakethesnake76's picture

Why is this site and you Tyler such a socialist ?? It takes a village like hillary says ??Communes Suck !!

jakethesnake76's picture

Why is this site and you Tyler such a socialist ?? It takes a village like hillary says ??Communes Suck !!

QuantumCat's picture

Social "Community" through a voluntary free market as opposed to the brute force of government. You need to think first, type later.

traderjoe's picture

From the article: "And as the state atrophies, we can therefore expect utopia". 

Do you read articles before you comment? If you don't like a FREE site that gives thoughtful articles on a Saturday afternoon, intermixed with some news in an interesting format that has one of the most robust commenting engines around...well, the exit is that way ===>

FIAT_FixItAgainTony's picture

amen.  don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya...

JPG101's picture

ZH has an ideology called reality maybe? Socialist: no. Have you been brainwashed into thinking anything which questions the established order is a socialist plot?

Think about who is served by MSM spin: billionaires and multi millionaires? If you are from the 'low million dollar' class on down: ZH is on your side. When the super rich attack us with Pravda style media spin, reality is our best and only weapon. Don't attack your source of real news.

ZH might be reality for those who can't afford the services of a MSM translator...

BumpSkool's picture

Damn Straight, Tyler... Damn Straight...


... you go

Mr.Kowalski's picture

I often wonder if life was better for the Pawnee and Sioux before the pale faces came than we now have it. It was simple, you were accepted as part of a close community, there was fewer instruments with which man could impose his will upon another.. 


That said, I believe that any post modern society begins with a currency system built from the bottom up instead of from the top down making indentured servants of us all save the few who can master the complexities of the economic system.



Yen Cross's picture

 Who cares! Ponder South Park!

dark pools of soros's picture

they would be frontrunning smoke signals by now as well...

QuantumCat's picture

We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force. Ayn Rand

tamboo's picture

her real name was alisa  rosenbaum and she clearly got off on the brute force.

QuantumCat's picture

Attacking the messenger, not the message... We grow weary of your simpleton tactics. You can't own me, looter. Peddle your trash elsewhere.

FIAT_FixItAgainTony's picture

"where the government is free to do anything it pleases"

yep, enter the court system and see how the gov't works for the banks.

Oh regional Indian's picture

The court "system". Hmmmm, everyone should look up BAR and then ask what swearing the oath that gets you a BAR registration. That will explan the court thing to most people.

Elaborate scams, one and all. Government, religion, politics. Three things that run/rule are all pure, multi-generational frauds. 


WaterWings's picture

I wonder if Tyler and Banksy are good friends.

Thank you for this post. And thank you, Tyler, for your fuerza.

Yen Cross's picture

 Robots can't kill racoons on my Apricot trees either. My shovel and a late nite on ZH will!!!  Lighten up with the junks, Girlie boys. Or should I say girls with egos and law degrees!  You are toast on this site! BITCHES!

Azannoth's picture

Life is a constant struggle, and must remain so to be healthy, any type of Utopia even an Anarchist/Libertarian type is doomed to failure through stagnation

Constant struggle for domination and constant struggle for survival are necessary for a healthy society, examples of the opposite are former Soviet Union, North Korea, European Union(soon to be former) etc.

Trying to take out the element of survival from society dooms it from the get go, in today's society where even people who are in a vegetative state are kept alive so that they maybe wake up in 20 years is a perversion of the Laws of Nature and Nature does not see kindly for it's laws being perverted, you have been warned

eddiebe's picture

Check out the movie "Idiocracy". Funny! the premise is that intelligent people have less and less children maybe because they worry about over population, but those a bit challenged dont give a shit and keep cranking out babies. So the 'stupid genes' keep gaining til we have Idiocracy. The rule of the stupid by the stupid.. Hey wait, now that I think about it, we're pretty close to there..

Redneck Makin-tosh's picture

makes you wonder about the movie's definition of intelligent

I did it by Occident's picture

Brawndo!  It's what plants crave!

A Nanny Moose's picture

If survival is the measure of victory, then "the stupid" stand a better chance, by sheer numbers. But what is "stupid?" Is it merely another straw-man? Is it just a tool to perpetuate the us vs. them paradigm? Shall we go steal their mascot, and deface their school statue?

New World Chaos's picture

Ironically, what we need is more intelligent, alturistic people.  The kind of people who are likely to worry about overpopulation.  If the elites were truly worried about overpopulation they would print up a few clownbux for anyone who gets fixed.  I know they want to reduce our population by 80%, but they would rather do it through war and starvation so they can exploit the chaos and consolidate power.  Also, the elites are trying to breed our dangerous traits out of us.  Smart, honest, independent people cannot be trusted.  The elites steal from such people so they can't afford kids, and some of the loot goes to indolent baby-pumpers.

Azannoth's picture

You know you just might have said something very smart, so the destruction of the productive and smart people might be by design

serotonindumptruck's picture

I appreciate the article leading off with a quote from Mikhail Bakunin, the ideological nemesis of Karl Marx. A few years back, when I was reading as much Marx as I could lay my hands on, it struck me that Marx spent an inordinate amount of time trash-talking Bakunin.

After getting my fill of Marxist ideology, I began studying the tenets of true anarchism with such authors as Peter Kropotkin and Pierre Proudhon.

Capitalism, much like Marxist-Leninist philosophy, seems valid in theory, however when applied as a system of governance, the flaws become self-evident.

Azannoth's picture

The problem is the humans always try to find a 'System' I guess it's how the brain is hardwired, however true intelligence is spontaneous, abstract and impulsive and does not need a system to function

Cthonic's picture

Ah, but those with a will to power require a system that will scale up beyond their immediate reach.  So long as the mass of men hold aspirations in their hearts and are unable to shed their fears, there will always be some who intentionally (and successfully) yoke others to their designs, even if such control is purely psychological in nature.  The economics of scarcity and the specialized division of labor are nearly insurmountable impediments to the attainment of ones natural rights, even before the coercive designs of men come into play.  Like voting booths, markets are violent places for the expression of majoritarian preference, too.

mayhem_korner's picture

Capitalism is not a government system, seritonin, it's an economic system.

Let's try this in kindergartenese: government systems include: theocracies, autocracies, monarchies, constitutional republics, democracies, etc., etc., etc.

Read The 500 Year Leap and you will understand more clearly that the current U.S. government system doesn't even resemble its founding.  That is what has failed.

serotonindumptruck's picture

Thanks for the recommendation. Maybe I'll check it out.

What precisely is the system of government in the USA? A constitutional republic? A democracy? Please enlighten me.

mayhem_korner's picture

Read the book (and the Constitution while you're at it) and see what it was designed to be.

USA has never been a democracy and was never designed to be one.  It isn't a functional representative republic these days either.  It is an "amorphocracy" shifting through "socialist dictatorship" to "hell-in-a-handbasketocracy"...

serotonindumptruck's picture

So we can just make up words as we see fit?

I can't tell if you're trying to be clever, or just condescending.

mayhem_korner's picture

Non-clever, non-condescending comment:

I am most times both, but always with intent.  I pick my spots where I (believe I) add value - mostly macro-economic stuff and history.

What drives me nuts is when folks converse - even quite intelligently - about stuff without having researched the original documents and/or events.  As an example, one of my mantras (to tip my hand a bit farther) is that the Bible is the most criticized book by those who've never read it.

The suggestion on The 500 Year Leap is an earnest one. 

serotonindumptruck's picture

I stand corrected. Capitalism is not a system of government.

I will say that the theory of capitalism is flawed, and no, I haven't read Keynes or Mises, so that is just my opinion, based upon the world as I view it. Capitalism has corrupted the US government, to the point that it resembles a socialist dictatorship.

I'll check out The 500 Year Leap.

A Nanny Moose's picture

I use to think this way. Then I started reading. It was not capitalism that corrupted the government, but the nature of people in positions of power. This was part of the reason, this nation was designed to illicit competition among the states, and the people.

What you are saying amounts to, "guns kill people." They do not. It takes an event, usually at the hands of an individual to cause the weapon to discharge. No it is not a false equivalency. You conflate mis-use of a tool, or idea, to enable coercion with flaws in the idea itself. I suspect you also expect that there is a "perfect system" which will end poverty, disease, and generally correct nature's "mistakes." There isn't. Never was, never will be. Life is terminal.

serotonindumptruck's picture

I don't claim to be knowledgable about everything in this world, which is one of the reasons that I like ZH. I'm here to learn and to be educated, and anyone who claims otherwise is most likely an arrogant asshole anyway, and not worth my time.

Your second point is a false equivalence, with me anyway. As someone who proudly owns a few dozen firearms, I am not delusional enough to buy into that false logic about "guns kill people". Bad example, and you don't know me at all.

Yen Cross's picture

 And the YOUTH ( JUNK SQUAD on something ) Postulates. Loosers living off their Mommies. Never held a HOE! The kind that never sows a crop.

      I have an appointment over seas. SUNDAY open. Jets and all!

Yen Cross's picture
 Girls can't find JOBS! I'm so sorry NOT
Roaming Uranus Looking For Klingons's picture

Yen Crossover, you are 45 and live at home.  You weigh over 400 pounds (on a good day) and have no life.  What, you think women dont play a part in our society?  Since you are so downtrodden on the women, I can say with assurance that you have never had a lady friend.    Enough said...................


Yen Cross's picture

 I'm 44 and wish I lived at home. I own a G-5 , and thats about it!

mynhair's picture

Oblahma is human?

SWRichmond's picture

OT: the OCC just issued a Cease and Desist Order against MERS.

My Deed of Trust states: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems , Inc. as beneficiary.  Later it also states: MERS is the mortgagee under this security instrument. 

Diamond in the rough?