The Evolution of Revolution; Or Stopping the Revolution at 180°, And Not Going Full Circle
Gregg Zegarelli Esq.
Managing Shareholder at Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group, PC
What if you were given a ring that had the power to make you invisible? You could do anything without accountability or social judgment. Would you do exactly the same things—watch football and do the dishes—or perhaps rather take a walk to a person, or a window, or a room, or a store, or a bank?
But there's a catch. Each time you wear The Ring, it corrupts you by addiction, causing you to fall in love with it and its precious power. You think you own The Ring, but it really owns you. You think you love The Ring, but you really love yourself with The Ring. Okay, okay, I know. For lovers of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, we recognize the allegorical scenario. Perhaps I've gone too far.
So, let us roll it back to a more concrete scenario of expression. Let us take the man who would be knighted, Rudyard Kipling, and his The Man Who Would Be King, as portrayed by Sir Sean Connery and Sir Michael Cain in the movie version. The two men, off to seek adventure, discover a "primitive" society who thinks Connery is a god. Oh, the self-serving wonders that a god can do in a "primitive" society, with all that power. Connery is not invisible, but that's only incidental, exposing the well-known Western legal maxim, "rex non potest peccare"; that is, "The King can do no wrong." Well, Connery makes a common manly error (such as the likes of Adam with Eve, Samson with Delilah, Mr. Bumble, and countless other men); to wit: he takes on a woman. Bad move. Alas, she is not going to have sexual relations with him, well, because he is a god. She is afraid that she will burn up in the process. (Actually, a pretty good excuse that many a man might yearn to hear...) So, in defending herself from his advances, she scratches Sir Sean, he bleeds, and, well, gods are not supposed to bleed. From there it goes great or terribly, depending upon whose side you're on. For the two men, not so well. A type of Western comeuppance or Eastern karma. At least it was good while it lasted, for a time. But, oops, I did it again, perhaps going to far.
Let's just deal with reality. Let's talk about Julius Caesar. A man, then a god.
No, no, no, again too far...
Let's roll it back a bit.
In George Orwell's allegorical masterpiece, Animal Farm, he tells of the worker animal revolution over the oppressing farmers, with the pigs leading the charge.
Lo and behold, some years after the revolution, the pigs and men become indistinguishable, the pigs now walking on two legs and wearing farmer's jeans, coming back around full circle. Here's an abridged synopsis by Sparknotes:
At the end of Animal Farm, the human farmers eat dinner with the pigs at the farmhouse. The other animals watch and are unable to tell pigs and humans apart. The pigs have started to dress and behave exactly like humans. The pigs have become as cruel and oppressive as human farmers. The ending makes the argument that political power is always the same, whoever has it and whatever ideology is used to justify it. Powerful people are cruel and selfish whether they’re pigs or humans, communists or capitalists. In our last glimpse of the dinner party, the humans and pigs are arguing because they have both tried to cheat at a card game in the same way at the same time. The corrupting nature of power dooms all political systems to failure.
[1] Now, conceptually, no one needs to be a college professor, or a college-degree English major, or a Philosophy major, or a Political Science major, or an Economics major, or a graduate master or doctor degree recipient, to get the point. This point of a revolution going full circle is all around us.
It is almost a skepticism general rule of human nature; that is, the leaders of the revolution, enjoying the spoils of the new power, evolve or otherwise descend into the very thing that was once despised. Perhaps it is as Thomas Jefferson said, "for man is an imitative animal." [2]
Indeed, grander privileged education aside, astute life-experience teaches the concept of a revolution coming back around full circle, often in subtle imperceptible increments, ultimately evolving back to become the very thing that was revolted against. Indeed, there are innumerable adages that expose the same point; to wit: children rebelling only to grow up to become just like their parents, the union boss becoming part of the oppressive management, senators gaining unique valuable privileges and health insurance, and so on.
These 180° revolts against the establishment, and then evolving—and revolving 360°—back into the very thing challenged by the revolt occurs for a reason. People are people. They have been and will be. [3, 4, 5] Society advances, but never human nature. [6, 7]
Let's take Napoleon Bonaparte. [8, 9] The French Revolution overthrows the monarchy, adducing the vengeance of the Reign of Terror, adducing Citizen Napoleon, adducing Emperor Napoleon. Revolution gone full circle.
Or, let's now revisit Rome. The kings are supplanted by the Republic that Julius Caesar overthrows, only to become a dictator and god, "Caesar" (and known as "Czar" in some contexts). Again, revolution gone full circle.
Orwell's Animal Farm, full circle. "Power corrupts...," says Sir Acton.
We can recognize, by experience, the animal known as "human being" and its nature. It's not that complicated. Survival, reproduction, attraction to pleasure, and avoidance of pain. Existentially, everything else is a corollary.
Now, some political philosophers ponder the question of whether human beings are "good or evil" in the "state of nature."
But I will suggest to you that the question is confused, outdated and has an antiquated hidden premise. It conflates nature and morality, which are correlated by human beings, but each has a different standard of existential consideration. Indeed, Mother Nature has been around a lot longer, running on her own framework of existence, without evolved human moral contemplation that she disregards as both irrelevant and impotent. [10] Only human arrogance and educational indoctrination try to make Mother Nature fit into a human framework of contemplation. Mother Nature and Father Time neither ask permission or forgiveness, nor do they have hopes or regrets. Mother Nature and Father Time can be avoided but not escaped. They do what they do.
Now, we should take notice that survival, reproduction, attraction to pleasure, avoidance of pain—as existential human natural tendencies—are physical, also noting the correlation that Aesop cleverly used animals to teach about social principles of humanity. [11] Even so, I will suggest that the denomination of the Aesopian "moral of the story" is a social misnomer; indeed, the fables are certainly lessons, but what morality they offer is in the eye of the beholder. Perhaps Jefferson's "Nature's God." [12, 13]
Moreover, we can take notice that, on a moral basis, sage Jesus said that "the flesh" is weak. Well, in all fairness to Jesus, he actually said, in context:
"Get?up and pray?that you may not undergo?the test. The spirit is willing, but the flesh?is weak.”
[14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19] So, we can ask ourselves—such as having asked why political and economic systems tend to fail [*10]—why do "revolutions" directed to a "good" have a tendency to revolve full circle back into the very thing that caused the revolt?
There are two things required for "civil society": education and implementation. This is expressed in the old adage as early as 1175 in Old English Homilies:
"Who can give water to the horse that will not drink of its own accord?" or "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink."
Knowledge is one thing, but it's the implementation that tends to be the hard part. Thinking is something, but doing is something else. Ignorance alone is not the cause of the world's ills. Knowing to exercise and to diet is one thing, but doing it is something else. Implementation is a function of the duality-harmonized balance of fortitude (courage) and temperance (discipline).
By definition, courage is going when there is an inclination to stop, and discipline is stopping when there is an inclination to go. Courage and discipline are contrary to natural inclinations, which is why they are deemed to be virtues; that is, anyone can succumb to natural selfish inclinations, perhaps as self-evidenced by the existence of prisons, or Caesars. If people knew what to self-regulate and did it, laws would be wholly unnecessary, as Founding Father, Father of the US Constitution, and President, James Madison, famously said, "if men were angels no government [laws] would be necessary..." [*19, 20, 21, 22]
Therefore, there is the clarity of knowing the objective, or wisdom, and there is the implementation of wisdom by courage and temperance, harmonized by balance (justice). Of course, this simply exposes the well-known Four Socratic Cardinal Virtues. [23]
But man remains man, and the common tendency is to succumb to the general rule of man, which is inherently selfish, as a function of the instinct to survive. It is not "wrong" to be selfish in the state of nature, because Mother Nature does not suggest martyrdom, but survival, by power of the fittest. Survival is quintessential selfishness. [*10] Mother Nature is out of business if the general rule is not to survive or to replicate. Attraction to pleasure and avoidance of pain are derivatives. [24] Similarly, without application of Father Time, the world as we know it would cease by being overrun.
The martyr self-sacrifices against nature for the principle. This self-sacrifice is "perfection," but ex post facto continuation of the principle tends to be by common imperfect (not "wrong") successors who simply cannot "continue to pull it off." A fanatical mob for a principle is not its own leader, as the Reign of Terror exposes.
Here is a quotation from the Memoirs of General William Tecumseh Sherman regarding the leadership of Abraham Lincoln, after the war had been won:
During this interview I inquired of the President if he was all ready for the end of the war. What was to be done with the rebel armies when defeated? And what should be done with the political leaders, such as [Confederate President Jefferson] Davis, etc.? Should we allow them to escape, etc.? He said he was all ready; all he wanted of us was to defeat the opposing armies, and to get the men composing the Confederate armies back to their homes, at work on their farms and in their shops.
As to Jeff. Davis, he was hardly at liberty to speak his mind fully, but intimated that he ought to clear out, "escape the country," only it would not do for him to say so openly. As usual, he illustrated his meaning by a story: A man once had taken the total-abstinence pledge. When visiting a friend, he was invited to take a drink, but declined, on the score of his pledge; when his friend suggested lemonade, which was accepted. In preparing the lemonade, the friend pointed to the brandy-bottle, and said the lemonade would be more palatable if he were to pour in a little brandy; when his guest said, if he could do so "unbeknown" to him, he would "not object." From which illustration I inferred that Mr. Lincoln wanted Davis to escape, "unbeknown" to him.
[On another occasion,] Mr. Lincoln was full and frank in his conversation, assuring me that in his mind he was all ready for the civil reorganization of affairs at the South as soon as the war was over; and he distinctly authorized me that, as soon as the rebel armies laid down their arms, and resumed their civil pursuits, they would at once be guaranteed all their rights as citizens of a common country; and that to avoid anarchy the State governments then in existence, with their civil functionaries, would be recognized by him as the government de facto till Congress could provide others.
I know, when I left him, that I was more than ever impressed by his kindly nature, his deep and earnest sympathy with the afflictions of the whole people, resulting from the war, and by the march of hostile armies through the South; and that his earnest desire seemed to be to end the war speedily, without more bloodshed or devastation, and to restore all the men of both sections to their homes. In the language of his second inaugural address, he seemed to have "charity for all, malice toward none," and, above all, an absolute faith in the courage, manliness, and integrity of the armies in the field. When at rest or listening, his legs and arms seemed to hang almost lifeless, and his face was care-worn and haggard; but, the moment he began to talk, his face lightened up, his tall form, as it were, unfolded, and he was the very impersonation of good-humor and fellowship.
We parted at the gangway of the River Queen, about noon of March 28th, and I never saw him again. Of all the men I ever met, he seemed to possess more of the elements of greatness, combined with goodness, than any other.
This was after the North effectively won the Civil War, and retribution and revenge were in the air by the victorious North. Lincoln was a human being, with all his faults, as such. Yet he was majestic, as such. Perhaps even as a human being (not a god), he was "perfect" in that he did the horror of what was required to accomplish the good objective, but no more no less. [27]
Abraham Lincoln knew how to go, and he knew how to stop, and he did both in harmony.
The law of inertia says that it takes power to go, but it also takes power to stop. Some people have only the power to go, and keep going, and keep going, misunderstanding that discipline is as every bit as important as courage. The incessant need of power is a form of self-psychological gluttony. Western philosophy and Eastern philosophy share the concept of harmony, which is a harmony of power, not only power in the going, but also power in the stopping. A leader must stop the very band-wagon that the leader was driving, with inertia applicable to both body and mind.
Let us see the point and learn from the similarly exceptional majestic nobility of George Washington:
In London, King George, III, questioned the American-born painter Benjamin West what George Washington would do now he had won the war. "Oh," said West, "they say he will return to his farm."
"If he does that," said the king, "he will be the greatest man in the world."
[*3] Why would George Washington be "the greatest man in the world," according to King George? Because George Washington not only had the power to go, but he also had the power to stop. Better yet, George Washington had the wisdom to know?when?to stop. He refused to be king, and volunteered his term.
In this rare human power of self-restraint, we find true selfless majestic nobility. But, this is the exception, not the rule. Julius Caesar couldn't do it. Napoleon Bonaparte couldn't do it. And Fidel Castro and countless others couldn't do it. Not many can do it. It's a narrow gate and few are strong enough to enter.
It's not the wisdom, and it's not the bravery. It's the discipline, if not the perfect love. But only the exceptionally selfless can pull it off, understanding all the pomp, privileges, comforts, and circumstances of power. The martyr conquers existence itself. But it has been said, "We do not need to touch the star to be guided by it." [*26] It is enough simply to be vigilant to see it and to follow it.
In 1776, a revolution began for freedom of thought, and freedom of religion. Our Founding Fathers pulled it off with prudence, courage, temperance and justice. [*18] No temperance (discipline), no America. Whether we can stay true to it, and to keep it, yet remains to be seen. [30, 31]
Here is a quotation from the inauguration speech of Founding Father and second President John Adams, reflecting on his predecessor outgoing President Washington:
[Such is President Washington, serving] wise and virtuous for eight years, by a long course of great actions, regulated by prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude, conducting a people inspired with the same virtues. Animated with the same ardent patriotism and love of liberty to independence and peace, and to increasing wealth and unexampled prosperity, that has merited the gratitude of his fellow-citizens, commanded the highest praises of foreign nations, and secured immortal glory with posterity.
领英推荐
In that retirement which is his voluntary choice may he long live to enjoy the delicious recollection of his services, the gratitude of mankind...
[30] And regarding necessary vigilance from Founding Father, James Madison; that is, to recognize the natural tendencies of human nature that adduce ending by a return to the place of beginning:
It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.? We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution.? The freemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedents....We revere this lesson too much...to forget it.?
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations....This danger ought to be wisely guarded against.
America is a temporal association for the orderly administration of a diverse people. Watch for it: the undisciplined revolution back to where it started, as is the weak tendency of human nature.
Alas, our ending is by reversion to our beginning.
It takes vigilance of conduct—wisdom—with selfless discipline, to keep the revolution at 180°, lest it unwittingly be a revolution gone full circle, like so many others throughout time. [*29]
[13] ONE: 2615; T26:41; R14:38 L22:40;L22:46]
____________________________________
If you know when you have enough, you will not be disgraced. If you know when to stop, you will not be endangered.?—Lao-tzu, Tao-te Ching
"You must remember that freedom of the soul is the goal of all Yogas, and each one equally leads to the same result. By work alone men may get to where Buddha got largely by meditation or Christ by prayer. A golden chain is as much a chain as an iron one. There is a thorn in my finger, and I use another to take the first one out; and when I have taken it out, I throw both of them aside; I have no necessity for keeping the second thorn, because both are thorns after all. Therefore, be 'unattached'; let things work; let brain centres work; work incessantly, but let not a ripple conquer the mind. Work as if you were a stranger in this land, a sojourner; work incessantly, but do not bind yourselves; bondage is terrible. This world is not our habitation, it is only one of the many stages through which we are passing. Remember that great saying of the Sankhya, 'The whole of nature is for the soul, not the soul for nature.' The very reason of nature's existence is for the education of the soul; it has no other meaning; it is there because the soul must have knowledge, and through knowledge free itself."?Swami Vivekananda.?Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda (ed)?
"I cannot call riches better than the baggage of virtue. The Roman word is better,?impedimenta, or impediments. For as the baggage is to an army, so is riches to virtue. It cannot be spared nor left behind, but it hindereth the march; yea, and the care of it sometimes loseth or disturbeth the victory. Of great riches there is no real use, except it be in the distribution; the rest is but conceit. Do you not see what feigned prices are set upon little stones and rarities, and what works of ostentation are undertaken, because there might seem to be some use of great riches? Seek not proud riches, but such as thou mayest get justly, use soberly, distribute cheerfully, and leave contentedly. Distinguish, as Cicero saith: 'In his keenness to increase his wealth it was apparent that he was not seeking a prey for avarice to feed upon, but an instrument for good to work with.'" Bacon,?Francis Bacon.?The Essays
"The history of money-getting, which is commerce, is a history of civilization, and wherever trade has flourished most, there, too, have art and science produced the noblest fruits.?In fact, as a general thing, money-getters are the benefactors of our race.?To them, in a great measure, are we indebted for our institutions of learning and of art, our academies, colleges and churches.?It is no argument against the desire for, or the possession of wealth, to say that there are sometimes misers who hoard money only for the sake of hoarding and who have no higher aspiration than to grasp everything which comes within their reach.?As we have sometimes hypocrites in religion, and demagogues in politics, so there are occasionally misers among, money-getters.?These, however, are only exceptions to the general rule.?But when, in this country, we find such a nuisance and stumbling block as a miser, we remember with gratitude that in America we have no laws of primogeniture, and that in the due course of nature the time will come when the hoarded dust will be scattered for the benefit of mankind. To all men and women, therefore, do I conscientiously say, make money honestly, and not otherwise, for Shakespeare has truly said, 'He that wants money, means, and content, is without three good friends.'"?P.T. Barnum,?21 Rules of Money-Getting, quoting?Shakespeare,?As You Like It, Act 3, Scene 2
"For what is a man?advantaged, if he should gain?the whole?world?and lose?himself?in the process? What could a man give in exchange?for his soul?" ~ONE?: The Unified Gospel of Jesus: 1543
"Consumption without limitation is gluttony. Production without consumption is drudgery. Neither extreme could be intended. It seems rightful to produce all that we can endure without drudgery. And to consume all that we can enjoy without gluttony. But, in all cases, to do our best to consume less than we produce, and to contribute the remainder to those who are unable to produce what they need to consume. Live well enough, and help others to live well enough." ~grz
"No man is free who is not master of himself." ~ Epictetus ?
"Enough is abundance to the wise." ~?Euripides
?
"Tempus ipsum recipit diem." ("Time gets its day."); "Moralitas non est in statu naturae." ("Morality does not exist in the state of nature."); "Societas proficit, sed numquam natura humana." ("Society advances, but never human nature."); "Id requirit potentiam ire et potentiam prohibere." ("It takes power to go and power to stop."); "Stellam attingere non necesse est ut ab eo ducamur." ("We do not need to touch the star to be guided by it."); "Mater Natura et Pater Tempus neque veniam neque veniam petunt, neque spem habent aut paenitentem." ("Mother Nature and Father Time neither ask permission or forgiveness, nor do they have hopes or regrets."); "Superstes est quintessentialis sui interest." ("Survival is the quintessential self-interest."); "Heu finis noster per reversionem ad principium nostrum." ("Alas, our ending is by reversion to our beginning.") ~ grz
*?Gregg Zegarelli, Esq., earned both his Bachelor of Arts Degree and his Juris Doctorate from Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. His dual major areas of study were History from the College of Liberal Arts and Accounting from the Business School (qualified to sit for the CPA examination), with dual minors in Philosophy and Political Science. He has enjoyed Adjunct Professorships in the Duquesne University Graduate Leadership Master Degree Program (The Leader as Entrepreneur; Developing Leadership Character Through Adversity) and the University of Pittsburgh Law School (The Anatomy of a Deal). He is admitted to various courts throughout the United States of America.
Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.,?is Managing Shareholder of?Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group, PC.?Gregg is nationally rated as "superb" and has more than 35 years of experience working with entrepreneurs and companies of all sizes, including startups,?INC. 500, and publicly traded companies.?He is author of?One: The Unified Gospel of Jesus,?and?The Business of Aesop? article series, and co-author with his father,?Arnold Zegarelli, of?The Essential Aesop: For Business, Managers, Writers and Professional Speakers.?Gregg is a frequent lecturer, speaker and faculty for a variety of educational and other institutions.?
? 2023 Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.?Gregg can be contacted through?LinkedIn.
The statements or opinions made in this article are solely the author's own and not representative of any institution regarding which the author is affiliated.
Stand for America? is a series of publications written by Gregg Zegarelli intersecting philosophy and traditional American values published by Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group. Printed or reprinted with permission.
#GreggZegarelli #Orwell #GeorgeOrwell #AnimalFarm #ThomasJefferson #JohnAdams #GeorgeWashington #Sherman #GeneralSherman #TecumsehSherman #Kipling #RudyardKipling #JuliusCaesar #Napoleon #Discipline #CardinalVirtues #Socrates #Power #Humanity #HumanNature #Revolution #Wisdom #Zegarelli #GRZ_172
TEV Law Group. Legal services for American entrepreneurs: Stand for America?
We Represent the Entrepreneurial Spirit.?
Diversity ,Equity, Inclusion Consultant
11 个月Gregg Zegarelli Esq. This piece is truly thoughtful.