What are the years like, just before the Year One of Kalotic Revolution?
They are years of "360ø War," the system of international and domestic disorder of the late Twentieth Century. It is disorder without dimensions. Pierce the container of human society from any side and angle, and desperate conflicts are touched.
In 1770, Edmund Burke spoke for 1970:1
There is hardly a man in or out of power, who holds any other language: that government is at once dreaded and contemned;that the laws are despoiled of all their respected and salutary terrours; that their inaction is a subject of ridicule,and their exertion of abhorrence; that rank,and office, and title and all the solemn plausibilities of the world, have lost their reverence and effect; that our foreign politicks are as much deranged as our domestick economy;... that we know neither how to yield nor how to enforce; that hardly any thing above or below, abroad or at home, is sound and entire; but that disconnexion and confusion, in offices, in parties, in families, in the nation, prevail beyond the disorders of any former time: these are facts universally admitted.
With the 360ø War, there is not and will not be any peace for the sake of peace. The basic condition of true peace, internal and international, a belief in some principle of legitimacy,is missing;the conventional, legal, and purely powerful forces that used to contain violence are weakened everywhere.
There exists within and among the world's nations a continuously boiling struggle to survive and rule. A full range of "limited weaponry is employed and must be employed by all parties.
The symbols of policies and propaganda are everywhere alike: "Self-determination;" anti-imperialism;" "peoples' war;" "foreign aid;" "communism;" "socialism" "democracy;" "self-defense;" "colonialism;" "insurgency;" "confrontation;" "freedom."2
The limited available resources for the 360ø War are disposed and allocated as parts of world-wide plans and priorities, but also as patterns of spasmodic or compulsive behavior. The U.S.A. was in Vietnam according to a general world scheme but also as a result of uncontrolled reactions in line with a type of American character.
Rural and urban areas are alike beset by revolutionary activities.
Wars in which two sides may be clearly distinguished are becoming less common.
Ideology is declining as a factor in causing conflict. but competition for ideological advantage has never occupied so important a place in the calculations of politicians.
All of this, and more, amounts to the 360ø War. Most of the world's educated classes today do not realize that so much warfare is going on and how it is all related to the universal need for a Kalotic Revolution. Many people who are concerned believe that it is a world-wide communist offensive against democracy.3 Others cheer the disorders as a revolution of peoples against their exploiters.
The aim of the Kalotic Revolution is to assimilate as many as possible of the dozen revolutions that will erupt each year and, where possible, to make its own type of revolution. Much therefore stands to be discovered and clarified. One must understand how, out of a universal set of conflicts, a positive world order can be generated. Otherwise the situation is underestimated, its course may be blindly opposed, and its potential may be exhausted.
The incidence of disorders and violence in the world is high.Ten percent of all who lived in the first half of this century died as a result of war.4 It has been the deadliest century since explosives were invented. Probably thirty percent of all people have undergone the agonies of wounds, rape,horror,disease,uprooting,prison camps,and confiscations of property, at the same time. Since the last great war among the large powers,there have been several dozen minor wars, several hundreds of revolts, and many thousands of violent demonstrations.5 About three-fourths of the world's nations have been involved in some kind of warfare. Because of the savagery of the Nazis in World War II, the total casualties of the more recent conflicts have not approached one quarter of those caused between 1939-1945.6 Nevertheless, the fewer casualties of the present period is a fact that bears little relation to the importance of the struggles being fought.
Besides the direct violent engagements, there exist at any given moment several dozen tension points in the world, such as Kashmir, the Panama Canal Zone, Berlin and the Eighteenth Parallel Amristice Line in Korea, where violence is continuous
on a low level of activation and may at any moment surge abruptly to involve the principal parties and other powers who may choose commitment or become inexorably involved. They are grouped below according to how critical their situations were in 1968 and coded where they involved a great power. The fluid nature of the problem is shown by italicizing the questionable placement of some of the spots and the failure to include Bangladesh, Ulster (Ireland), the Dominican Republic and others, all of these being changes during a brief three year period.
Ranked according to intensity, which may change rapidly [Group P: Primary (involves U.S.S.R., China,and/or U.S.A.) Group S: Secondary (local; between minor parties)]
CRITICAL: Vietnam (P,S); Middle East (Israel) (P,S); Yemen (S.P); Nigeria (S).
NEAR-CRITICAL : Laos,Cambodia,Thailand (P,S);Czechoslovakia (S,P); Rumania, Yugoslavia (S.P); Austria Finland (S,P); Korea (P.S); Angola, Mozambique (S); Zambia (S).
CONSEQUENTIAL: Rhodesia (S); Kashmir (S); Cuba (P,S); India-Chinese Border (S,P); Berlin(P,S); Cyprus (S); Anguilla (S); Panama Canal Zone (S); Quemoy and Matsu (P); Hong Kong (P,S); Taiwan (P); Indonesia (S,P); Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, Guatemala,Haiti (P,S); Burma (S).
DISTANT: Republic of South Africa (S); Sabah (S); Algeria (P); Oder-Neisse Line (P,S); Gibralter (S); Okinawa (S); Nagaland (S,P); Quebec (S); Belgium (S); Basque Provinces (S); Cataluna (S).
NON-CRITICAL: Puerto Rico (S); Alto Adige (S).
* Based upon the original work of Feliks Cross, World Politics and Tension Areas (New York: New University Press, 1966), updated by June Massell and author.
Criticality is an uncertain judgment. The calculations of world powers can change a relatively quiet area into a stormy one, or a local crisis into a world crisis. Radio communications and air supply and transportations, plus Maoist doctrines and successes, permit considerable violence nearly anywhere. The world consensus now lets any trouble be rationalized in terms of world revolutionary slogans. The United Nations provides a mechanism for receiving and announcing the universal meanings of local disputes.
Which local point is to be selected or employed for escalation is also difficult to foresee. Indicators that scholars are compelled to use to demonstrate the relative criticality of tension areas are not to be relied upon. They have little predictive value. The latest World War, and perhaps the final devastating war, might have begun over a few Soviet-implanted missile sites on the islands of Cuba in 1962. So many are the prophets of doom, however, that there will always be someone who is correct when he says, "The next world crisis will occur in..."
As with criticality,so with stability. Numerous scholars have sought indicators of instability. Dividing 84 countries into "modern" (24), "transitional" (37) and "transitional" (23) types,7 the Feierabends found the modern most stable, the traditional considerably less so, and the transitional least stable as indicated by the number and intensity of tumults, coups,and insurrections.8 Since the transitional countries are presumably countries in which people are more able to agitate and have more unfulfilled wants, the findings appear to be logical. Actually, the really considerable difference in stability relates to the modern countries as opposed to the transitional and traditional lands. And the modern countries are, of course, without exception well-to-do countries;that is, per capita indicators of well-being are a good deal higher than in the in the others.
Yet, as we shall see later on, the modern countries are by no means models of stability; they have different kinds of instability, unmeasured in large part; the U.S.A. is undergoing tremendous mobility and change; its disorders have mounted rapidly since the study cited was prepared for the period 1948-1962; its "fire engines" have been dispatched all over the world where the worst "instabilities" have come into crisis form. Other "stable" countries do not act so stably either: Australia was fighting in Vietnam; Czechoslovakia was torn apart by the events of 1968-9; West Germany is in another crisis over West Berlin as these lines are written; Britain is undergoing a crippling coal strike,embarrassed by religious dispute in Ireland and racial dispute in Rhodesia; the Philippines are experiencing renewed guerrilla action; Portugal has insurrections occurring in Angola and Mozambique; Uruguay is in economic crisis. As with criticality, so with stability: the world is in trouble everywhere. No country has the true qualities of stability. Each depends upon world order; the world depends on all of them. All need a Kalocracy.
To have Kalocracy requires:
First, an authoritative system of goals: that is called "Kalos." The principal parts of Kalos are the Trilogy of human drives: Emos, Pneumos, and Dikeos, which essentially mean to ingest, to quest, and to adjust.
Second, a group to achieve the ideals rapidly: the Tutors, they shall be called, if they are active. Sympathizers are called Kalists.
Third, a Method of Revolution: Stressed Democracy and Kalokinesis, to bring a) large-scale 360ø change b)rapidly c) everywhere.
Fourth, a set of policies (economic, social and moral) that are sufficient, if adopted, to achieve the kalotic goals.
Fifth, constitutional process (or structure) for considering, shaping, and executing the policies. On the world level, this is Cosmarchy. On the group and national level it is Toparchy.
|1.||Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents.|
|2.||Albert and Roberta Wohlstetter, "Third World's Abroad and at Home," The Public Interest (1969), No.14, pp. 88-107; Carl Leiden and Karl M. Schmitt,eds., The Politics of Violence: Revolution in the Modern World (Englewood Cliffs,N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,1968); Morton Halperin, Limited War in a Nuclear Age.|
|3.||Richard J. Barnet (Intervention and Revolution, New York: World Publ. Co.,1968) presents the history of American involvements in counter revolutionary policies, based largely on anti-communism,since World War II. A sober general review of the totalitarian movement in revolution is available in Sigmund Neumann's Permanent Revolution: Totalitarianism in the Age of International Civil War (2nd ed.,New York:Frederick A. Praeger,Pub.,1965).|
|4.||Quincy Wright, A Study of War (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd ed., 1965), pp. 212,242,569.|
|5.||Harry Eckstein reports 1,632 "internal wars" in the period from 1946 to 1959 alone. IV History and Theory (1965), p. 133.|
|6.||World War II,1939 to 1945, cost 17 million military and 34 million civilian dead. Half as many soldiers died in World War I (1914-1918), and 30 million civilians, but the population base was only one-half its World War II size. As this book goes to the press, the horrors of the Bangla Desh massacres, in which over one million persons were murdered and ten million sent fleeing from their homes, are being exposed.|
|7.||The U.S.S.R. and China were not included.|
|8.||Cf. Ivo. K. and R. L. Feierabend, "Aggressive Behaviors Within Polities, 1948-1962 : A Cross-National Study,"X Journal of Conflict Resolution No. 3 (September, 1966), pp. 249-71.|
|9.|| Several words have been coined for the purposes of this work. Each was needed for one or more purposes: as linchpins to help hold together a treatise of large scope; as substitutes for common words that were overladen with connotations; as rhetorical devices; as tokens of the cosmopolitan spirit of Kalos; as means of orienting bodies of data; and as common referrents that should remain the same when the treatise is translated from one language to another. The etymology of all is classical Greek, a common source of scientific language, except the word "Tutor" which is from Latin and means "teacher" in several languages.|
Kalos is constructed term, as are all of the kalotic elements. Its ancient relation is kalon, which means "the beautiful" in an ideal sense well-formed and virtuous. Even closer is Kaloskagathos, which "became the ideal of every citizen aspiring to higher culture, finally coming to mean simply 'civic virtue'. Werner Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture (trans. Highet, New York: Oxford Press, 1939), Vol. I, pp. 416,444. Emos meant "mine", all that belongs to one and that one takes in Dikeos also has an ancient relative;"Dike means the due share which each man can rightly claim." It implied the legal enforceability of justice. I: meant also equality under the law. Ibid., P.103. Pneumos is "spirit" :air","Soul". The adjectival forms (-os) of Greek simulated in the endings is intended to lend operationalism and force to the words.
Kalocracy, rule by Kalists and Tutors, believers in Kalos, uses the common "-crat" and "-cracy" endings (cf. democrat) in its literal ancient sense of the ruler or governing [power (kratos).
Dystrocracy (see below p. 18) comes from the word "dystropos" meaning misoriented, ungovernable.
Stratocracy comes from "stratos", army, the root in strategy, meaning military.
Taxocracy is in origin "taxis", an arranging, a class of magistrates.
Plutocracy is from "plutos" meaning wealth, and ploutokratia.
Politist (cf. p. 82) is a political activist of any movement: A Tutor is a politist of Kalos. (cf. Alfred de Grazia, Political Behavior, 1952; New York: Macmillan, 1962, Chapter 3, for etymology)