Having reached the conclusion that it is Heroism itself that the Right must embrace as its North Star, I would like to begin the process of pealing back the first layer to examine the first sight implications. Now I mean to wrap up this series and this article will be more speculative and less analytical than the first two essays in the series. Nevertheless, my goal here is twofold. The first is to provide a preview of what I hope will be a new political theory based on the imperative of Heroism as the highest ideal of man. Second, I want to put forward some examples of how this process can be utilized so that other philosophers can copy it to create their own political theories as well.
Heroism and Individuals
Every individual needs meanings and goals in life. For political individuals it is necessary for their individual goals to resonate to some extent with their political philosophy. It is here that each right winger who embraces the politics of heroism can provide his life with dangerous excitement. Determine to become your own hero in your own way.
It would be useful to have a working definition of Heroism first. I will define Heroism as fighting and conquering a tough challenge. Even better if no one in history has met and overcome that challenge before. And even better if there are powerful opponents trying to thwart the victory.
Even a concretized definition of Heroism will mean different conquests and challenges for different individuals. For right wing intellectuals, like those at CRI, embracing Heroism can mean making a determination to write at least one book with original scholarship on a topic that has not been covered before or with a new angle that has not been examined on a previous idea.
Embracing the imperative of Heroism is the notion behind me setting up a challenge to myself to produce a book of political theory based on the philosophy of Heroism. I will struggle with the question that has not been posed before let alone wrestled with, “What would a civilization based on Heroism as its highest ideal be like?” and “What would be its political expression?” And I shall produce a big book on the topic.
Do likewise. As a thinker set a hard challenge for yourself. Answer a question that has not been answered before or create a question that has not been posed before and then answer it. If you determine to perform a heroic deed in your life then as a political thinker you can do no better than determining to produce a book that lays out your own original political contribution.
Heroism as a Creative Source
Heroism must also be a source of creative ideas across all facets of culture and civilization for it to serve properly as the right’s North Star in politics. Liberals and the Left have utilized their big idea to respectively churn out many movements, theories, laws, institutions and cultural artifacts, many of which I provided as examples last time. The Right must use Heroism as the big idea to do likewise. Keeping in mind that liberals and egalitarians have had centuries now to educe their derivative creations from their big ideas, it will take the Heroic Right some time to catch up in the production of material.
No matter, for here and now we shall start the process. Asking ourselves the question “What would be the heroic action?” in every particular context we shall start laying down a path ahead.
Take the question of lost lands of our ancestors. The llaalloo liberal will say make nice with those holding the land lost in past wars? The heroic right will roar: Reconquista! Then here is an institution the right can form using heroism as its guiding motive: The Reconquista Society! A society that meticulously documents the lands and mountains lost in past battles and advocates plans to take them back.
Take the question a youth faces when choosing his field of study. Using Heroism as the ideal he can decide he will study those fields that will make heroic contributions to the polity and civilization. He can pick Aerospace Engineering, Nuclear Science, Robotics, Mechanical Engineering and the like with the determination to work fanatically to advance in the field and unleash their power. If it is not natural science but social science, then he can determine to tirelessly churn out copious amounts of scholarship with an eye towards bolstering the idea of heroism and the auxiliary virtues of strength, power, glory and victory. This also holds political implication for the Heroic Right as it can be the state policy to provide free education to very smart students who choose fields that enhance power and wealth of the polity and represent heroic endeavors; Space Science for example.
Turning from the serious matter of studying to fun matters of cultural pastimes and recreations, Heroic Right can also decide to start a fight against the Bourgeoisie sport of Cricket and replace it with an Aristocratic pastime like Polo used to be in the past. An Air Polo played with fighter planes! When the right comes to power that would be developed and made into the big time sport for the boys, at the same time training them for air war against enemies, just like horse polo was intended to do.
What a potent force the idea of Heroism is turning out to be for the young right!
Right here and now we have thrown up in the air three new potentialities: The Reconquista Society, an institution; Scholarships and encouragement to youth to study fields not out of bourgeoisie concerns of money and career but heroic desires of power those fields can unleash; and Fighter Plane Air Polo!
Heroism and State Politics
Now I will take the first shot at the question of the structure of the state using heroism as the ideal. So far there has been much talk in the Right about discovering an alternative to the universal suffrage democratic assembly, but no one has dared to venture forth and to speculate on the alternative. I am far gone enough that I will go beyond where the map says “here be dragons” and risk falling off the edge of the world by proclaiming an alternative state structure.
First, I want to create a methodology that will serve as at least somewhat objective guide to resolving the question. The fundamental principle must be this: a state can only promote those traits in the civilization which the members of the state offices themselves possess.
The state cannot promote those virtues which the officeholders of the state themselves are lacking in. The numbers do not change this and increase in quantity does not lead to increase in quality. One sheep acts like a sheep, and 100 sheep do not make 1 lion. Just like 1 sheep will run away when charged by a lion, so will 100 sheep run away. One fool will be a fool and hundred fools do not make a genius. You can take hundred or thousand fools, throw them in a room and they are not going to come up with a brilliant idea on account of their numbers. Virtues and vices are not added but averaged out in the groups.
This has implications for politics of the state. A full suffrage democratic assembly will be the grand average of virtues and vices of the great mass of people. It cannot rise above the mediocre. If philosophers wish for the state to rise above the mediocre then they must devise a way for superior individuals to consistently and systemically get into the offices of the state.
What laws and projects would a heroic state promote for the glory and grandeur of civilization? Namely, they would fall in three categories. The martial category: to increase the martial strength so that the enemies and rivals can be defeated in the struggle for power that is eternal. The industrial category: to increase the industrial wealth of the country so that the heroes have capital to pursue grand projects. The technological category: to increase scientific knowledge and build technological capacity.
Then the state would have to be composed of people who not only have the ability but also the passion for strength, for wealth and for knowledge.
Fellow rightists, I give you the: House of Aristocrats!
A Single, Unified State ruled over by the House of Aristocrats made up of the best and most heroic individuals.
Now, it is become a dogma these days that decentralism is better than unified authority, but I reject it. However, to avoid getting sidetracked, I will postpone debate on that topic to later. Let’s get to understand what this House of Aristocrats would be composed of.
I propose a threefold division of the House of Aristocrats. One third of the seats would be reserved for the warriors, one third would be reserved for the industrialists and one third would be reserved for the scientists.
Let’s say this house will have 300 seats with selection every 10 years.
First, there will be a warrior assembly that will select its leaders from its officer class to serve in the house and occupy its share which is 100 seats. Any individual who serves as a soldier or warrior for a minimum of 5 years can vote, but only those who retired as officers can actually stand for office of these seats.
Second, there will be an industrial assembly which will select its leaders from industrialists to occupy its share of 100 seats as well. Any businessman who started his business from scratch, created at least 10 full time jobs for 1 full year, not including family or relatives, and is not in bankruptcy can vote; however only those businessmen whose companies manufacture concrete, physical goods can actually hold those seats in the house.
Third, there will be a scientific assembly which will select its leader from individuals with high levels of intelligence to occupy its share, once again 100 seats. Anybody who is a scientist, engineer, mathematician, philosopher, thinker, or even a right wing intellectual on internet websites (CRI writers!) can vote or occupy these seats.
Thus, the house of aristocrats will be 1/3 divided equally amongst warrior leaders, industrial visionaries and brilliant scientists and philosophers.
This will mean the political leaders of the state and polity will contain within their characters the very traits whose promotion on larger, civilizational level will lead to flourishing of mankind: elites as well as common folks. Common folks can go about their lives, enjoying the Benevolent Paternalism of a TechnoAristocratic Elite, without having to rake their brains about matters of politics, which are above the level of masses’ intellectual ability anyhow.
While this state will not be democratic, it will not be autocratic either; I will call it an Aristocratic Republic. There is some republican element in it as the members of the house will be voted in by some select political actors. However, the aristocratic element is the purposefully dominant one as all the actors represent one or other high quality virtue in their person.
This then also anticipates and answers the objection of liberal democrats, and a valid one I will acknowledge, of state tyranny. While on the relative (percentage) terms the political actors who are involved in selecting the statesmen will be quiet few, on absolute terms their numbers will still run into a few million. This significant number due to a large population pool will not tolerate crooked or oppressive members of the house. At the same time, the demagoguery and mass delusions of universal suffrage democracy are avoided altogether as well.
I will answer a couple of caveats that maybe raised. Some will wonder whether one of these three classes could drive the polity into some reckless adventure. I have anticipated this and why the division is one third. Either one of the three classes in the house will need support from members belonging to the other two and this will introduce reasonable caution and rational analysis of proposals for policies, projects and adventures. However, let’s be blunt, the bias will be towards heroism, and is intentional because the Heroic Right believes it is better to reach for glory and greatness than stagnate in mediocrity.
Others will wonder why other sides of civilization such as arts or literature been downplayed in favor of the three categories of strength, wealth and knowledge. Another objection that I have anticipated and I do not mean to say that these are to be ignored. Certainly great art and architecture will be provided with patronage. Nevertheless, these do not play a determining role in the question of progress and stagnation. They are valuable jewels that any civilization aspires to produce, but must take a backseat to existential matters.
Alright, so there is my first attempt at trying to formulate a state based on the idea of heroism. I would like to emphasis that this idea is a tentative one, much more rough, first draft and much less a final, polished argument.
This concludes my quest to discover a process for the creation of a grand political philosophy. However, the longer journey to actually create the political theory based on the philosophy of heroism has just begun.