Drastic change - distinction between revolutionary process and revolutionary direction
“The orientation of the events depends on human intention and escapes the determinism of the conditions produced by the present system.”
This blog speaks about social and cultural revolution. I will explain the difference between revolutionary process and revolutionary direction. The first thing that we need to clarify is the mechanically oriented system that we live in.
As we know, throughout history there has always been revolution within society and civilization. If we analyse these moments of revolution, in most cases we see that there were given conditions that generated revolution such as accelerated disorder, concentration of power in the hands of a few, social injustice, discrimination, spirituality, religion, etc. But one of the most important factors that generated revolution that we don’t hear much about, is the mechanism of the system in proceeding to revolutionize itself without the intervention of any progressive group, set of ideas or orientation. When we speak of social and cultural revolution, we mean a dramatic change in people‘s living conditions, a political revolution that will alter the power structure.
It would be appropriate when addressing the question of revolution, to make the distinction between the revolutionary process which is intrinsic within the system mechanism and the revolutionary direction, which is related to human intention towards the future.
Maybe it’s time for us to understand that revolutions are inevitable and will happen soon or later as disorders accelerate in a system that is more and more concentrated by the mechanical centrifugal forces.
So what are the options ? Moving towards a revolutionary direction.
That is why the fundamental question is this crucial moment is related to the direction we want to give to our life and to the events that will happen in the coming months. That is why it’s fundamental to revolutionize the direction of the system, by opening it up to the diversity of human needs and aspirations.
Revolutionary process and revolutionary direction
According to Silo, the revolutionary process is understood as a set of mechanical conditions that are generated as the system develops.
...such development creates factors of disorder that are ultimately either supplanted, assert themselves, or end up causing a breakdown of the entire scheme of things. According to this analysis, the globalization toward which the world is now proceeding is generating acute factors of disorder in the overall development of the system. And, as we have discussed in previous letters on more than one occasion, this process is independent of the voluntary action of groups or individuals. The problem that now arises is what, precisely, will be the future of this system, given that it is mechanically proceeding to revolutionize itself without the intervention of any progressive orientation whatsoever. (Silo, Letters to my friends, p.84)
As the mechanical conditions generated by the system get more and more destructive, it’s pretty clear that there will be a future revolution. Either we let ourselves be swept along by the tendency toward a world that is ever more absurd and destructive, or we give events a different direction.
But today many people don’t want to hear anything about revolution. These right-thinking people continue to exercise censorship. According to them the real revolution has failed, clearly this is a topic that may no longer be discussed. They take it for granted that the substance of any revolution must involve a bloodbath, accompanied by an indispensable backdrop of marches, gestures, and leaders with rigid mental forms. These people have poor knowledge of human beings, social processes, revolution and revolutionary direction. The fact is that they don’t understand the mechanical “structure” of the system. They have no idea of the existence of a basic paradox of the system which produces accelerated growth of disorder in his final development of concentration.
Basic paradox of a system
The basic paradox of a system is the accelerated growth of disorder in its final development and we understand that these disorders generate destruction as it happens many times in history in previous systems. The only way to avoid total destruction is to open the system up to news horizons, to diversity and human aspirations. Just observed how in history new ways of thinking, of seeing events have created conditions for drastic changes.
Underlying this formulation is the dialectic of freedom versus determinism, the human search for choice and commitment versus the acceptance of mechanical tendencies and processes with their dehumanizing end. (..) It would be dehumanizing to go once more round the same circle until some other civilization arises, only to mechanically repeat the same stupid steps again—that is, if this is still possible after the collapse of the first planetary civilization that is now beginning to take shape (Silo, Letter to my friends, p.80)
Most people don’t realize that one’s own destiny is a particular case of the wider destiny. They believe they are an extension of a wider destiny. Most people move toward the fields of necessity and don’t believe they have an effect on the direction of the events. But the time has come to move from the field of necessity to the field of liberty, towards a revolutionary direction. When I speak of revolutionary direction I understand that the center of this direction is the human being's aspirations and needs. Moreover, I speak of a new form of revolution that corresponds, by his essence and by activity, to the humanization of the world.
In every revolution, drastic transformations of society‘s structures, must immediately be set in motion, the social framework has to correspond to human beings' aspirations.
According to Silo, education and health are the framework to deal with social complexity and technological challenges. In today’s world with COVID19 and so many complex problems, free access to education and health care for everyone are beginning to be clearly the two highest values of our time, and must replace wealth and power in the current social paradigm.
“Viewing everything in terms of the priorities of education and health care provides the correct framework for dealing with the highly complex economic and technological challenges facing today’s society. It seems that in no other way, certainly not while wealth and power remain the highest values, can a society with evolutionary possibilities be formed.” (Letters to my friends, Silo, p. 49)
The present situation of dehumanization
Health, education and well-being
Today, on July 14, the UN General Secretary said that more than 690 millions people don’t have adequate nutrition to survive. This situation is intolerable and we know from past economical experiments that reforms will not bring food, health care, jobs and education services.
Everywhere in the world, people have every right to desire access to adequate nutrition, health care, housing, education, clothing, jobs, and services. And when they reach an advanced age, they have the right for a secure future for the remaining years of their lives. People have every right to want their children to have a better life.
The reality is far more than what people desire. In fact for thousands of millions of people, adequate nutrition, health care, housing, education, clothing, and others services are basic aspirations that remain unfulfilled.
Meanwhile, we are seeing the continuing concentration of big capital to the point of worldwide collapse. Day by day the concentration of big capital generated dehumanizing conditions for billions of people. Day by day the continuing exploitation of natural resources by the big capital generated is destroying biodiversity.
In front of this world either we let ourselves be swept along by the tendency toward a global situation that is ever more absurd and destructive: a world convulsed by hunger and overflowing with refugees; a world of endless fighting, warfare, chaos, constant fear and never ending pandemic ; a world of abuse of authority, injustice, in which new forms of obscurantism will take over the system Or we choose to give a different direction to these events.
Placing the human being as the central value
We know that future revolutions will not develop beyond the stage of organized mobs if they do not advance in the clear direction signaled toward a system of social relationships whose central value is the human being and a direction toward humanism and popular revolution. This is why the pressure of oppressive conditions is not in itself sufficient to set change in motion, rather it is necessary to realize that such change is possible and that it depends on human actions.
Placing the human being as the central value implies an idea that is totally distinct from what is generally understood today by the term human being. The current models used to characterize the human being are still far removed from the idea and the sensibility necessary to fully grasp the reality of what is human.
Most definitions of the human being implied a “permanent” human nature, something that cannot be changed, a fixed nature. According to Silo this way of defining the human being has imposed permanence.
“I mean if the natural has asphyxiated the human by means of an order imposed by the idea of permanence, we now say the opposite: the natural must to be humanized and this humanization of the world makes man a creator of meaning, direction, transformation. If that sense liberates from supposed pain and suffering conditions "natural", is therefore truly human which will be beyond the natural; your project, your future, your child, your breeze, your dawn, your storm, your anger and your caress. It’s your fear and your longing for a future and a new human being free from pain and suffering that are truly human.” (Silo Speaks, p.85)
Silo explains that the struggle of the human being is not between mechanical forces. But, rather, a struggle between human intentions. He goes on and explains that from human intentions we can speak of the oppressors and the oppressed, the just and the unjust, the heroes and the cowards. It’s the only thing that allows a meaningful practice of social solidarity and commitment to the liberation of those who suffer from discrimination, and from various forms of violence whether they are majority or minority.
For humanism, a revolution is implied to go toward a system of social relationships whose central value is the human being, and not other values such as ―money, productivity or ―a socialist society, for example.
For humanism, knowledge produced by women and men of science should be used to overcome hunger, pandemics, disasters and climate change.
Humanists reject any attempt to monopolize or restrict the use of knowledge to improve human life and developmental wisdom, social justice and peace.
Silo refers to the concept of revolution to the work of G. Petrovich, which he defines revolution as a new mode of being in the world.
"Still, and it is important to point this out, beyond the confines of today‘s naive and superficial models there are some signs of a revival of critical intelligence. To mention but one case, the work of G. Petrovich1 embodies concepts that presage the present development. He defines revolution as ―the creation of an essentially distinct mode of being, different from all being that is non-human, anti-human, and not-yet-entirely-human. Petrovich concludes by identifying revolution with the highest form of being, as ―being in fullness‖ and ―Being-in-Liberty. A new concept for the revolution." (Silo Speak, p. 89)
When humanists speak of revolution they understand that violence is not an essential component of the revolution to come. What good would it be to follow the repugnant practices of imprisoning and executing one‘s enemies? What would be the difference between this and what oppressors have always done?
There are many social changes brought about by popular pressure and not through violence. India‘s anti-colonial revolution was a popular revolution that demonstrated a new methodology of action and struggle.
In a humanized world, human intentionality would be free, without ownership by others. In a humanized world violent lifestyles would be exhausted and replaced by models based on true reciprocity, collaboration and solidarity.
Future revolutions will have to take on an inclusive and transforming character based on what is essentially human.
What is human ?
To conclude this blog I would like to share with you these thoughts about being human.
“To feel the human in the other is to feel the life of the other like a beautiful multicolored rainbow, which fades away that I want to hold, catch, remove his expression. You move away, and I feel comforted if I helped break your chains, overcome your pain and suffering. And if you come with me, it is because, in a free act, you constitute yourself as a being human, and not only because you were born "human". I smell in you the freedom and the possibility of constituting yourself as a human being. And my actions find in you my target of freedom. So, not even your death will not stop the actions that you started because you are essentially time and freedom.” (Silo Speaks, p.90)
-----------------------------
In our next blog we will speak of moving from the field of necessity to the field of liberty. We will speak of the sudden and profound change that we are beginning to see with the emergence of new models. We will propose some distinction between revolutionary process and revolutionary direction.
We will discuss a new kind of revolutionary direction which corresponds to the transformation of the essence of human being and his activity in the world ; a humanizer of the world.
Reference: Letter to my friends, Silo, 1993. Silo Speaks, 2004.
Comments
Post a Comment