TREATISE ON
AUTONOMY:
THE ROTATION
OF SELF IMPOSED
CAPITALISM
Gbujama J. M. (2008)
This treatise accompanies earlier Clivus Transactus manifests,
as well as research development concurrent with Critical Information
Publications standards. Inclusively, the treatment is in the tradition of
political science and philosophy, empirical knowledge and practical
applications; less theoretical and more responsive to existent problems.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
If one were to ponder the autonomy of man and its implications
what would be the conclusions? The issue would be most pertinent in
understanding the self and its distinctions; would be the only distinguishing
factor between the oppressive socialist or capitalist state and that of a free
society. By autonomy what is suggested to exist, is the idea of a self
governing entity that acts of its own free will, whether in group form or as an
individual; and that functions as a catalyst towards the unbound thinking of
intellectual production. Yet this is nothing new of idealism; from
Rousseau and Kant to Friedman – Douglass to Soyinka. One must ask then
how does this drive for autonomy conflict with the democratic principles of
state authority and its philosophy of peopled pluralism? In part, to answer
that question, democracy in definition must not only be put in its place as
being a debate between issues of equality and that of government by the people,
since it is not necessarily implied that because the people rule, that there is
necessarily any form of equality in motion, particularly if the free market
system finds itself under the revolve of intimidation in an effort to control -
and as well, if the mechanisms of government serve as a cloaking trade in place
of the natural functions of the state, given that, for the most part,
government is what it does more-so than what it appears to be. Value systems as
well, both corrupted and perverse may impede on the process of such development
despite any such records of historical reconstruction. Again and again there is
the ambiguous value zone which often takes no prisoners in drawing its line of
operations. Therefore any unrestricted attempts must be excused in deviation,
since autonomy especially is about issues of self control. These theories
cannot be restricted to western philosophy either, since as argued by scholars,
African culture is perhaps one of the freest willed existences in the world, a
reason given for the dispersion of tribalism interests as being really a
struggle between the numerous tribes and dialects to retain control over their
own lives. Thus not in imitation of Kantian theories per se, these types of
examinations are an attempt to translate a spirit of freewill which has been
limited to being seen in the vision of post-colonial struggles in the African
sense, civil rights in the American or that of human rights in the
international. On the contrary, what is examined is the collective
standardization of behavior that can be found in the inter-diplomatic, clerical
and disciplinary search for sanity.
What could be more oppressive than a dictatorship of the
people? Were not such conflicts the fundamental opposition to the crucifixion
of the Christ? If we were to examine the number of social agents in place of
actual motherhood; the number of police and judge-ships in position of existing
fatherhood, or the ratio of pre-textual emergencies in disposition of the
emergent child, what would arrive in this balance? The state then it is argued,
must be in alignment with these factors, as holding its own distinctions of
social genesis, acting instead, as a common agent governing in settlement of
conflicts and the establishment of protections and agreements, instead of that
of a neutralizing agency. By neutralizing agency the inference can be made,
that it seems almost unfortunately coincidental, that there is recurrently an
echoed propagation of qualified professionalism towards the direction
of crisis itself; when what is needed is a bureaucratic case by case
or autonomous interpretation of incidents and occurrences that are
pertinent to the development of, as mentioned, that self governing authority.
It is this kind of independence that sparked most Renaissance movements of
history, or solves the calamities of natural disasters and war. Ergo, if the
systemic sequence is that government has failed; then is relied upon for
instance, as a purifying means from within - such means in obvious will fail,
unless ancillary methods are set in place to improve performance.
Yet the issue of autonomy has found its most terrible contender
in existentialist being systems in regards to the conflict between natural
hierarchies and those of merit, if not in the very idea of hierarchy itself; in
patriarch systems, matriarch systems and the like. On the one hand, while
notions of hereditary talent and nurture are interdependent and do shape and
define the responsible structure of lineage; yet on the other, the later
concepts of talent and nurture do greatly imply a system of merit. For example,
co-operative systems headed by families, much like chieftains in principle,
justify their place in such formations giving low priorities but long term
interests to issues of incremental merit. However, this is contrary to
non-familial co-operative systems of merit and democratic processes, which
often place high esteem, yet short term interest in issues of merit, deferring
instead to issues of business interests and market demand. Therefore, let
the venture be risked, that familial autonomy within co-operative and
governmental systems is perhaps in estimation, the most accurate manner in
which to view the development of definitions towards self government,
co-operative socialism and as often desired; capitalist interest. It is an
unfeigned reflection of person, relations, function and wealth. This may
enable even the unattached and singular aspirant, to incrementally develop both
family following as well as continue in matters of fiscal enterprise.
Yet still, it is questionable whether or not such co-operative
systems represent a practically supportive long term interest. The conflict
between family growth and its corporate autonomy has always been at the helm of
business enterprise (and this is nothing new) its transformations,
procedures and failures. For instance, theoretically speaking, in the
application of socialized interests, the interpretation of government
ownership and property ownership in general, has often existed in a
duo-pendulum of private interests and that of public, with the perceptive
assumption being, that what is mentioned in the meaning of private, given, is
that monetary exchanges have occurred within authorized securities towards
ownership. Even though such may be the case with public interests, the
idea that corrupts its definition, is the imposition of democratic
interests in the process of autonomy; that public income cannot be used
towards individual prosperity or that a public facility cannot be used to
further private interests; or that the individual is thus a composite due to a
public capacity. While that may be an argument in the alleviation of
corruption, it does little in addressing the quasi-corporate charters and
contracts found in bureaucratic agreements, grants and programs that are
autonomously utilized. The distinction in proper often being;
that such government resources are expected to be utilized correctly and
are not go through a Squander Gate, as regards the Whistle Blower
rule, more so than to restrict access to government facility in the process of
autonomous production.
All things considered, the most practical debate on the subject
of autonomy rests on the Internet. The increase in its use begs question; to
what purpose does the compression, mobility, and miniaturization of such
systems positively affect the modern office, business systems and education,
and that of socialized behavior? In what manner can it serve a realistic
purpose in so-called emergent economies? It is safe to argue that while
the variances of raw materials from less industrialized economies on the
one hand and that of high product use and industrialization on the other
remain; the Internet has greatly served as a panacea towards bringing the
conservatory of text, images, advertising and search engineering technology to
the tropical and austere political and academic system of African countries;
uniting the availability of affordable technology from Europe and Asia to a
system once ground in the archaic expertise of text and exercise book lessons.
This is not to restrict such characterizations to these regions only,
considering the contributions of African nations to the modernization process
of the economy of Asia (the automobile industry in the 1970’s for instance)
only to emphasize elements of progressive development. Again, the translation
of this conservatory into that which is both beneficial to the individual and
his group interests is what is most important in regards to preventing the
exploitation of intellectual thought through partial nationalist protections as
in Cuba or the nation of Guinea for example, or its unrelieved corruption
within the chaos of the free market system by democratic, cooperative and
hierarchical interests, in which again, the individual is unrewarded. This is
not to deny that technology misapplied is a most dishonest means, but this is
not about technology and its crooked servants - but about its
representations and the individual’s effort. It is safe contend, that
absent of a belief in autonomy, citizenship rights are left thus to a
pluralized struggle in which identities and causes are only temporal, histories
have no transitional value, and the family ceases to be the basis of political
authority; in deference to the captured market and mob.
In this regard, one must consider the issue of family autonomy
to be the most troublesome since the idea of the autonomous family and that of
autonomy from the family are two distinct concepts with their own unique
outcomes. In the first instance, the autonomous family implies that the family
itself is not a dependant of the state or ward of the political system,
but a contributor or valuable asset of the political state. Such a family
may own a business, hold accreditations of scholarship, teaching and learning,
or are set as example for others in the daily operation of matters of
government and are in an overstated sense, stately candidates. In the
second instance, autonomy from the family suggests a more cultural
undertone of conflict, in that it implies the development of modern
alternatives against the political fusion of heritage. This kind of autonomy
can be found in systems that rely on chief authority in which such fusions are
descended from a patriarch or matriarch, tribal and spiritual following. In
Sierra Leone’s pre-independence saga for instance, rural chiefs failed to
comprehend the idea of independence since it implied something inconceivable,
which is an allegiance to modern parliamentary authority and constituent body.
Yet such did not address its inability to alter the implicit nature of the
family structure. In other words, the primary rumination was - how can one be
independent from their own identity? These questions often retain permanence in
relation to systems in which family is tied to both lineage and leadership.
Perhaps a stable concept on autonomy may never be clearly
developed, yet, if one was to be forged, the conclusions can be drawn (but not
limited) that there are five basic advantages to its application. First,
autonomy limits the growth of identity theft corruption as industry. As
implied, identity theft is the primary factor and neutralizing component in
government and business relations; it is a composite acquisition of rights,
features, exposures and behavior which has a devastating impact on social,
political and personal relations. Let us call it for lack of a better term; dog
government, of those things beleaguered and troubled. Overall, even though
such elements manifest in a pro-legal sense, still, there may be a
significant effect on consumer and individual improvement, in both
the market place and polity. In the plural it may also effect regional
and constituent standardization. John Wayne and Clint Eastwood are caricatures
of western USA more-so than cowboys are a simplification of either. The
second reason for autonomy is the preservation of history in which the
individual as aggregate does not suffice personal sacrifices and lessons
of moral journeys, contributions and results relatable to their
experience. Given such argument to be the case, the idea of the biography
thus retains its effectiveness and record of accuracy. The third reason
would be the proliferation of schisms, since often the lack of autonomy may
tend to prematurely part company alliances and agreements on which the
foundations of identities are built. Perhaps this is most characteristic of
revolutionary philosophical conflicts in which one leader is often snowballed
for another which leads into the forth factor; the obvious reasons of clarity
of character as related to issues of deviance and moral
development which is mentioned in the discourse of
troubles with the prison state. It is quite interesting how it is only devout
scholars of Central American politics can distinguish the leaders of the Cuban
revolution for instance, with beard, fatigues and platform rhetoric. Or
understand the intricacies between Modibo Keita, Sheku Toure, S. I. Koroma, and
Desmond Luke; thus Siaka Stevens is distinguishable in the proverbial sense,
Nkrumah in the African. As well, in the early days Sierra Leoneans were often
mistaken for Nigerians or Ghanaians much like American for Canadians. The
suggestion is not made that these familiarities were not cohesive but that it
was autonomy that sustained their existence, not the similarities, and allowed
for the development of co-operative convention, or albeit - a radicalism.
Finally, is the issue of meaningful generational transitions, of which a well
practiced state of autonomy may aid in the prevention of what may for lack of a
better word be termed as improper generational fusions in which there
is retained a certain degree of unnecessary dependency instead of a correlation
between different age groups.
Previously argued, ever since science dissented from philosophy
as subject matter, there has become need for more law, rules and regulations
such as the development of behavior studies pertinent in the actual
interaction of concepts of autonomy. How can the individual be autonomous for
instance if there are no set rules of behavior? How can persons be autonomous
if there is no learning of methods of critical thinking set in place? Can any
system encourage such changes without contradicting autonomy’s limitations against
the issue of self-control? Furthermore, there is the consideration of
science as having a twofold effect; first, while modern devices and their
mobility and capability of network serve their own advantage, it often stands
against an adversary; that of democratic pluralist interests and the socialized
extensions of such systems. Perhaps one of the experiences every Internet
writer must come to terms with is the upset on existentialism because of the
impact of what is written, and the neutralizing and probable attempts to
balance which are actualized in the form of public reaction and governmental
review. Therefore this neutralization between individual autonomy, its
technology versus extra democratic elements is what may be in the way of
autonomy’s growth as a modern technological component. The cleric may as well
be in the monastery or up in the mountains more-so than in the mechanical
complex, in the home more-so than the bureau and in seclusion more-so than be
in common. Perhaps these are just a few mentioned paradoxes of autonomy and its
applicative frustrations - but none surpass the need for such awareness.
Research Development and Comparative Studies in Political
Science C.I.P
Washington D.C. Completed August 2008
