There is something lurking in the last few entries that is probably not obvious to those not reading the Traditionalists, and that is the negative views they share on democracy. Maybe this is due to stodgy Old World conservatism, but that is not what they say. Rather, Guenon specifically makes a point that the rise of democracies is a sign of the imminent collapse of the human order. The theory is rather simple and elegantly made: that is, if the human collective has become so far removed from greater reality, so will the decisions of this human collective. Ignorance will only breed more ignorance, which will further entrench this ignorance in a vicious circle that will not end well.
This view is as pat as the certainty of the collapse of our age, but how can I agree with it? His alternative is to have the wisest among us lead - that is, those who are superior to the masses. Few could argue with that except: how are we to chose these superior individuals? Certainly, Guenon would not claim the we must search among the richest or most acclaimed for worldly success; rather, these wise people must come from that tiny fraction of humanity that has realized God in self. Again, I cannot argue with that, but again, who is to ascertain exactly who is among this elect? It reminds me of the latest conclave of Cardinals in Rome to chose the next pope. Although the Cardinals are no longer vested in actual secular power, it must be admitted that many among them sought their positions for reasons of self-aggrandizement. Would they not chose the next pope for equally mundane (and sinful) reasons? Logically, we should only have the wise chose the wise, but where do we begin? Who chooses those first? And how wise must one be to see through the guises of others?
I have read that among the tribes of the Plains, one could tell where the peace-ruler of the group lived simply by searching for the most tattered teepee with the fewest horses outside. He was always the poorest because he gave everything away - and thus won the deserved respect of the people (our rulers try to do the same thing, but with other people's money. Not the same). I do not know how true this held in fact, but it is not a bad way to select a leader. Could we thus find leaders who are truly superior to us, without the interference of others with ulterior motives? On the face of it, it seems so: find the intelligent people who give so much to others that they are financially humble, and who explicitly do NOT wish to rule - and have them rule. We could tinker with this a bit, but it certainly seems that it might work.
But then look again at the systems the democracies have for choosing their leaders. The bottom line has been and remains that the brass ring goes to the greatest self-promoters. I do not see how that can be changed with any reasonable degree of success. It is one thing to grow up and live in a community of 30 related people, as the people of the tribes once did. It is another to grow up and live in the mega-societies that we have today, where image can be manufactured, the more money the better.
So where does that leave us? One of the founding fathers (John Adams, I think) said something to the affect that a nation such as ours (America) can only exist when the overall will of the people remains firmly embedded in moral righteousness. Now a days, however, it may be impossible to find even a small group of people who could agree on what was morally right. I don't know: Churchill said that democracy stinks, but that it is the best system man has yet devised. But Guenon and John Adams would agree: nations that are peopled by the amoral will either fall into tyranny or die.
Perhaps, then, world civilization has gone too far; perhaps it has gotten too big and complicated to run effectively and our end is immanent. But democracy is no more the devil today than is theocracy. Perhaps what Guenon should have said was that no decent governing body could arise at all today. Another sign of the fall, but the less pessimistic among us might also a see a possible start. How, that is, do we get the leaders who are superior to ourselves rather than the ones we deserve? FK
RSS Feed