Can I Fly If My Driver' License Is Expired?

a horizon on the foundations of society and the communist ideology

The men, considered in relation to their peers, are divided into two categories:

• who exercises a power;

• who suffers a power.

The distinction between these categories is never clear. No one always has power and no one suffers alone. Since every person can exercise the power in principle on all material objects (as these are passive by nature), then the exercise of power in humans results in their objectification.

Conceptually, the two major categories derive the two fundamental archetypes of society: the ideal servant, who suffers only the power but not pursuing anything, and the perfect gentleman, never the other way round is not subject to the power and exercised it only. This in reality translates into intricate relationships and alternative worship and servitude, but in principle we can identify with the word "servant" who does not exercise almost no power and with the word "sir" not the one who has almost never. The number of servants is directly proportional to the power of the Lords.

Lords may exercise the power on serve in two main ways: reducing them to slavery or placing of their work. Slavery consist in whole or in part of the will of the servant who takes over that of the lord, and may in turn be expressed or implied in the first case, the man turns out to be infinitely powerful and the servant surrenders voluntarily or is forced to do (think of the great pharaohs and kings) in the second, took over powerful tools that affect The special will also unconsciously (this is the case, for example, advertising). Since the work is an activity that generates a tangible or intangible product, the lord can exert power on the servo appropriating the fruits of his labor. The appropriation may be paid, and that is where the ladies realized its power over money and updates his majesty owning a product, or unpaid, such as those farmers who are required by law to donate a certain amount for the nobility maintain it.

Under the definitions given so far, almost exclusively those who have enough power to procure the commodities will be served for the most of the time, while those who can take possession of secondary assets, will be considered luxuries and riches sir. It is obvious that slavery as defined summarizes the lower classes of every historical period. Their power is limited in practice to stay alive to continue to work, and work to stay alive. What little power that could be used to advance the goal of escaping temporarily to their status: the abuse of alcohol or drugs that sapped the self-consciousness, gambling, and through the imagination illusion of being gentlemen, or situations of units group in general such as typhoid or stage a mass in the church, where the homogeneity of the identity of the crowd dissolve the particularity of the individual.

A separate discussion deserve the media, especially television. Its role is twofold: on one hand makes the viewer identification with the passive role of women (through shows, movies, scenes of opulence deceptively accessible, etc.), the other always keeps alive the fear of social disorder and convinces the viewer that the society is the best possible for those who are not at the top of the social ladder (the means are: crime, images of riots, epidemics, charities, etc.). It also encourages the process of dissolution of individuality within a group identity with the transmission of football, pounding programs that expose to public contempt of the criminal characters, and so on, are all fictions designed where you try and you initiate a position by the viewer, perhaps by people who claim to speak or opinion (whether intentionally or unintentionally) the unbearable, so as to facilitate the choice of which faction to side without having to raise any critical process. The discussions are consistently on the superficial aspects, and language is very simple, so that the viewer can now choose which group to belong, and exchange for this freedom is not aware of being in a cage.

These three elements, making losing the viewer with the right knowledge of self and the world around him, allowing very effectively to maintain the status quo in society. And 'necessary fact that impose stability by all means, because in itself does not exist: in particular if a huge power is concentrated in the hands of a few and many are forced to live in servitude, the discontent will lead to violent riots and reversals of social status in a basically cyclical.

The exercise of power is for each structural political and economic system that history has ever known, without exception, and we can reasonably say that it is congenital essential for human beings: the man is will to power and his social life is a response to the need to exercise this power.

But what about communism? In its various forms, is to essentially the goal of elimination of the rule, in so doing, they would be less inequality and thus social conflict. The result should be a peaceful society and socially flat, in which no one can exercise power. Of course, would be abolished also the lowest forms of worship such as the ownership of primary goods, which are instead owned, rationed and distributed by the state. A communist state should only produce goods needed, eliminating what is purely noble: the surplus (or appropriation of property, excessive) and the superfluous (such luxuries).

In some respects the ideal communist society reminiscent of Sparta in ancient Greece:

• no Spartan could accumulate wealth or luxuries (which indeed they were despised);

• ate in community and every citizen belonged to a table that was supposed to help bring the fruits of labor of the fields that had (in the municipality are not provided for landowners, but it is significant that each put Shared products of their land);

• the life of every citizen was covered and perfectly punctuated by the collective life and duties to the polis (discounting, to the state, we think the Soviet Union, but also to other totalitarian regimes of 900).

But Spartan society in the exercise of power was admitted, the helots, ie slaves, doing the most menial raising their lords, that the free citizens of Sparta, from the state of servitude. It follows that civil society was formed by a group of gentlemen equivalent (or equal ) that did not carry power between them.

Communist ideology maintains and extends the equality extends to all men in order to eradicate the exercise of power, and keeps their total subordination to the state.

However, there is need for someone to produce the goods necessary for survival under universal equality everyone must provide, in various ways, their work. The products of this work, since the power has been abolished, it is not for one rather than another, therefore, become property of the state that redistributes them equally to the citizens. From this follow two crucial observations:

• every citizen is well within the logic of "work to live and live to work" of his servant, as it works, does not own his work and receive only what is necessary;

• the communist state is lord over his people as has the work and life of every citizen (repressing the initiative, freedom, the will to power, etc.).

So the most logical outcome of communism is to create a nation of slaves. Also behind the word "state" is hiding the dictatorship of the Communist Party, and that we know both from theory (even Marx foresaw, but even if he had not granted and it is obvious that a company already in its anti-human conditions could only be achieved by brute force) and by the practice (the USSR is the clearest example for us Europeans). The madness of ideology as usual led to mass deportations, massacres, repression, oppression, forced labor and so on. And all this in the name of equality, justice and social peace.

Returning to the master-slave dialectic: a common feature of many gentlemen is that the more exercise a great power willing to exercise a greater extent. In other words, the more satisfying their instinctual drives, the more these you are big and wasteful. The Lord has attracted and fascinated by the figure of the gentleman ideal, although this attraction is not in need. The groped to embody it leads to a fatal self-destructive spiral: the aim to dispose of the world, to objectify anything to break the moral law, civil and criminal corrodes itself up to destroy it. The man is alienated from himself, he becomes a machine hungry for pleasures that wanders astray without ever finding contentment. What about the ladies then alienated except that it is slave of his passions and his greed? The increase in proportion to the power port to become the lord servant of his own power. And a capacity large enough to be inevitably self-destructive harms the society in which it is located. To defend itself should advance to ensure that the power of an individual does not increase beyond a certain limit within which there is a substantial balance and a harmonious alternation of lordship and bondage in every citizen. If you can not reach this situation, then the easement should not necessarily be seen as a negative moment, but as a mutual self-giving to another. Here is another essential aspect that emerges along with the human will to power: the pursuit of love. "Love" is obviously not to be understood in its specific forms such as falls in love, but how universal the push that makes us everyone feel part of a unit root, which can be enclosed by the concept of brotherhood.

Specifically, each individual should give up the lure and attraction that generates the rule absolute, without chasing it (the Spartans despised excessive wealth wisely). If you blindly indulge their passions to self-destruction, everyone should work to ensure that its action was caused by a thought really free from the bondage of the passions and trying to act as a master of self. But even in the ego, as in society, one can not help but think of the servitude must be guaranteed a harmonious alternation between rational irrational and that the individual is healthy and pursue their own good. The domain of one of two things makes men partial and therefore unable to realize himself, while the mean places man in harmony with oneself and with society.