Sergey Lebedenko

Possible consequences of the US “Maidan”

Possible consequences of the US “Maidan”

The recent events in the United States, nicknamed by journalists as the “US Black Maidan”, show a crisis of regimes based on the principles of the struggle of political groups for power, the so-called polyarchic regimes.

The fundamental of the functioning of polyarchic regimes is based on individualism, often disguised as liberalism; on narratives of oligarchic media loyalty supporting opportunism in the struggle for power; tolerance, which was poverty-stricken to a banal nihilism.

The US example is indicative. The country combines two different political regimes — a direct democracy at the state level and a polyarchic at the federal.

If consider the history of the development of citizens’ self-organization from the time of the settlement of America, the election of sheriffs, we will find interesting details. Over time, the functions of elected sheriffs were pushed aside by the functions of police officers subordinate to measures.

It is an obvious creeping dismantlement of the powers separation. Both mayor and police are sort of representatives of the executive branch, but actually, they are not. A gradual substitution of concepts, a mid-level polyarchic system of governance based on the partisanship of mayors, plays a cruel joke with the current President of the United States. He finds himself in a Zugzwang — no matter what measures adequate to the situation he takes, he may be the loser in the autumn elections. At first glance, the essence of the problem is not visible.

Nevertheless, here is the question: the mayors in whose cities the riots broke out (the state police are also subordinate to them) have one interesting common feature:

  • Sylvester Turner — American politician and lawyer, Mayor of Houston since 2016. Member of the Democratic Party.
  • Muriel Elizabeth Bowser — American politician, Mayor of the District of Columbia since 2015. Member of the Democratic Party.
  • Keisha Lance Bottoms — American politician and lawyer, Mayor of Atlanta, Georgia. Member of the Democratic Party.
  • Bill de Blasio — American politician, Mayor of New York since 2014. The first Democratic mayor in almost 20 years.
  • Eric Michael Garcetti — American politician, current mayor of Los Angeles since 2013. Member of the Democratic Party.
  • Greg Fischer — American business man and entrepreneur, the 50th Mayor of Louisville, a Democrat.

Judging by the photo, the complexion of the first three ‘police curators’ is not so light that journalists could talk about the antagonisms between the authorities and rebels based on skin color.

Most likely, this is far-fetched factor just to add the fuel to the fire. However, the coincidence that all the ‘police curators’ are members of the Democratic Party is very suggestive. Moreover, if this is considered not as a coincidence, which is even superimposed on time of coronavirus infection, Donald Trump's reconsideration of WHO funding programs and research of financing various shady funds and programs at the expense of American taxpayers, then the adequate conclusions will arise.

The struggle for power in the United States is entering a hot phase and the current President of the United States will not be able to win by using any traditional methods. The reason is the equality of forces in traditional fighting approaches. The so-called confrontation with relevant capabilities is a confrontation of attrition with the probability of victory of one of the parties 50/50.

A confident victory (landslide win) of one of the parties can be achieved with a qualitatively new approach, with the broadcast of a message of a higher social level, opposed to critics and approved by the broad masses of citizens.

Such a message right now may be the construction of modern democracy on the principles of Pareto efficiency.

Politics and economics are related things. Over the past two hundred years, the world economy has been going through some qualitatively changes several times. Since the settlement of America and the formation of established government forms, the technological structure of society has changed six times, the economy has become globalized. Thus, a qualitative gap occurred between the economic and political methods of management and regulation. With globalization and fact-based events of technological processes, corporations have forced small and medium-sized manufacturers out of the market. By reducing the resource-based possibilities of control and lobbying, their active participation in the political life in other countries also declined. Globalization has expelled the regulatory role of the market as well — latent cartels and groups of global lobbyists, who own budgets comparable to those of many countries, have replaced that power.

There also are deeper and interrelated factors: ubiquitous individualism that arose in the first technological patterns, formed as a result of the need for individual competitive qualities of market relations, and the popularization of the opportunism development in society. These two factors affected the political systems of countries. The preservation of opportunistic principles in today's political and economic reality has led to the enrichment of the dodgiest society members through the impoverishment of the bulk of the world's inhabitants. This situation has caused social tensions in many countries. Discharges of tension, which we observe in different parts of the world, are not spontaneous, as it may be seen at first glance; they are provoked.

Further development in the situation are possible in different directions without changing the opportunistic principles of social behavior. Nevertheless, even in the most optimistic version, this is a confrontation of everyone against everyone in different variations of strategies and its outcomes, which worsen the quality of life of people. Stripped of fine words, hybrid wars of attrition await us. Actually, the lives of people are threatened with destruction due to the lack of constraints.

The presence of the development of a society of opportunism in the economy, politics, social life at this stage means the desire for the dominance of one person, groups or clans, does not matter, but in a limited resource and society space will be implemented at the expense of other members of society. Another variant has not been given yet. Opportunism is finite by its nature within limited resources and spaces.

Political and economic populism are derivatives of opportunism. Opportunism of various clans, e.g. communist, social-democratic, during the third technological order of the last century in the conditions of distributed space and basic resources at that time has already posed a threat to the world, resulting in two world wars that led to terrible consequences.

Because of the events, the post-war transformation of opportunistic principles of behavior towards the Pareto-efficient ones made it possible to enter without any pain into the peaceful phase of the democracy development across the planet, to allow humanity to pass through the fourth, fifth, go to the sixth technological structure and globalization of the economy. The foundations of the principles of collective security, the prospects for universal development have entered into the picture. People felt free, the era of mass travels and simple human contacts around the planet began.

Unfortunately, those who still remembered the consequences of opportunist concentrations of power and resources in one hand had crossed the Great Divide. Subsequent generations do not retain that experience at the genetic level. The chain of subsequent events that occurred, which under wraps of tolerance and liberalism, population brainwashing, jump-started the opportunistic principles of behavior to all spheres of human life. Now it is not difficult to guess to whom it was profitable looking at the distributed resources and the received benefits.

Ordinary people, being obvious beneficiaries of Pareto efficiency, but carriers of mass consciousness, which is syncretic, contradictory, emotional and superficial, are not able to come to a common understanding and accepting of the social reality. For this reason, nations are not able to implement more progressive social principles. Principles of Pareto efficiency may be implemented into society by a strong individual or organization having the appropriate resources, able to form goals and ways to achieve and implement the intended.

Nevertheless, the motivation for implementation will be more likely to appear, if individual or organization have specific benefit. Such an “opportunistic” paradox.

The existing “window of opportunity” for introducing social Pareto efficiency is more situational than consciously necessary in the absence of extreme situations.

The presence of extreme social situations (reinforcing the contradictions of opportunism) confirmed by history indicates the conscious implementation of the Pareto-efficient principles of building societies: immigrants with a lack of resources, in the post-war world order.

Thus, due to the accumulated contradictions, there is an objective reality and a “window of opportunity” for the transition to Pareto-efficient principles of development of societies without factors of extreme environmental situations at this moment.

Time will tell whether Donald Trump use the “window of opportunity” or not, combining personal interests with public interests. It is a known fact that Donald Trump is not a classic party player and builds his career by positioning himself as a strong independent individual with his own principles and views.

He has colossal resources, influence and support of voters, what allows him making a historical transformation of the political regime both within the country and to scale the system in the world. Trump has a real opportunity to restore the substituted democratic values ​​that are Pareto-efficient by nature right now. The immense authority and chained attention of all the world media to the activities of the American president will create an instant global narrative of innovations. The mathematical provability of self-regulating Pareto efficiency in multi-level direct election of officials for short periods will ensure the formation of clear goals and objectives of the team. The strategic goals that have been set will be simple and understandable primarily to the American people. This will provide widespread support for the sitting president, both in stopping the useless spending of American taxpayers' funds to finance pseudo-democracies, the pseudo-fight against systemic corruption, and in redistributing funds to help build democracies on brand new principles to many countries, and the direct separation of powers.

The United States will be able to regain the lost world formal and informal democratic powerhouse, and to consolidate civil society.

Critics of the sitting president of the United States can also take advantage of the “window of opportunity,” but whoever did this, the American people in the first instance and the people of the world would be in huge gain and security.

Date: 5 June 2020