Both Liberté and Egalité are focused on individualisation, whereas Fraternité is focused on the opposite. Liberté leads to ourobouros capitalism, where markets are destroyed by the 0,1%ers that corner every market around the globe until there’s only a tiny elite and billions of slaves left. Egalité, in its pure form, is about the same – communisme where no-one has anything at all which is a state where free speech or free will is dangerous to the ultimate flatness of society.
Both are hierarchical systems to the extreme. Both require global coordination – hence introducing organisational choices that can only be effectuated, or lead, by, ultimately, indivi-duals. As Man is a biological being, it strives for its individual survival first, its own offspring second, and then … nothing as that has a potential, however remote, of hindering one’s own first and second. Leading to the extremes; balanced beings will be overtaken by non-balanced ones.
But as Man is a social animal, and will be, this will frustrate attempts at (further) extension of (some individual(s?)) liberty and/or equality by extremist hierarchy: LE are limited by Fraternity, or overthrown. Limited, timely or overdue, by masses that haven’t lost their individuality sufficiently yet to control them or come from the outside showing Another Way. Or destroyed, by revolution which throughout human history has been the corrective absolutely normal and expected means of restoring balance in whatever factor is overthrown.
LEF is a triangle, and humanity decides where the angles are. Humanity decides whether it, consciously but more probably unconsciously, ‘grows’ the surface area, and in which direction.
There’s so much more to it. E.g., the basics on wiki – note the Dutch page is much, much shorter as we know so much less of thinking in principles, but we do have the reference to Van Reybroek’s piece – when you follow the links there, you’ll find that the wiki page is ominously partial in its interpretation of Reybroeck’s piece… through the latter by the way points to the, more important, Matthieu Ricard.
And note the variants of the three-word combo through time, befitting something which may have rubbed the wrong shoulders throughout history.
Of course we’ll study the sources behind the wiki pages and much more, to arrive at something operational, possibly, against ‘either ourbouros capitalism or pure communism’ that is in the LE-polarisation discussion. For now, I let this one rest though, or fester? in the back of my mind. I’ll return on this one!
Bam. Ideas arrive faster than I can jot them down, even with my writing and typing skills [is that the same as being able to drive stick-shift and automatic just as easily and ‘professionally’..?]
E.g., tying in with the above, a discussion on privacy (quite and individualism thing, as per ability to live freely and have no limits put on choice) – where anonymity play a role in being able to escape control … re Signal, ‘social’ media, elite-capture of the Fourth Estate, and means to evade. If there is a way out of Total Control (if not when, excepting true destructive revolutions), how would they go about in this sphere?
Or basic Freedoms, like freedom of speech, and their limitations in not harming others with the same as that is a limitation of their freedom, to not be subjected to your (relative) abuse. Are the Freedoms individual ‘possessions’, or where are they property of the society in which you live, that developed them for you to use? What Contract Social? On which side would Fraternité sit?
And how do people still believe their vote counts..? Infinitsimal, at best. I vote for a party that never gets into any coalition. How does my vote count? How does ‘democracy’ work when a (li-te-ral) handful of people determine who’s eligible / can stand in the first place ..? And that my splinter party even has a program… that my preferences match with for at most 40% – other parties less to much less – but starting one’s own party has been made impossible, from scratch. Münchhausen was a fabulist; no-one can truly defy actual gravity but the ignorant (Dunning-Kruger). ‘Yes but if no-one would vote, democracy would be lost’– well if people do vote, there’s no difference is there? No surprise that the Dutch Regentenopstanden (where proles ramsacked gents’ houses and threw the inventory ito the canals) are so suppressed (even the English wiki page lists only ‘normal’, sanctioned revolts), instead of being cherished as signs of any will to freedom from defunct hierarchy.
