Of law and freedom

The word leader is a misnomer in relation to government. If a law is a compromise, we all are partners and everyone is equal and absolutely complementary. A leader isn’t someone whose influence is determined by statutory status nor position. A leader is a mentor, a person who exhibits qualities that ignite ingenuity in others. A leader has the ability to listen, to understand, to compare, to derive, to link, to ignite and to inspire. But in government, the law leads everyone else follows. Law is a compromise which sets limits to society’s extreme aspirations that can presumably impede a harmonious society.

Government is established by law, runs on law and with law (without the law, there’s no government), which the society has the right to change at will. The society is supreme in relation to the law, whereas the law is supreme in relation to any person or any group of persons. And because a law is the collective and documented agreements of the people and it is the pivot of any government, a state is only led by law, not the people that have been appointed to work in the government. Government is not an institution to lead people. The only function or duty of any person who has the opportunity to be part of government in any nation is to serve those who have given him or her the brief. Hence being in a statutory position doesn’t make anybody a leader.

People must give specific representatives in government at any level certain expedient rights that must not be subjected to consultation. But the government has no right to make any policy that isn’t subsequent to consultation with the people who have given it legitimacy. A government can only convince or give advice to the people it is serving; a government must not be allowed to dictate. It is irrational for any society or nation to allow those selected or elected as members of a government to arrogate to themselves the power to dictate to the people who have selected and elected them as representatives. Action is a constant response to spontaneously random signals from the web of bodies while reaction is a predetermined interpretation to these signals from osmotic bodies in direct proportion to an individual’s explicably measurable factors, thus making discretion in justice dispensation irrational too; it is an inequity. All laws governing a nation must be a pre-establishment of governmental institutions and pre-appointment of appointees; and absolutely a collective agreement of the people. The function of any government is to manage national resources and all that are members of a government are mere managers that must be absolutely accountable to their people.

Nobody exercises freewill by voting in an election. The ability to think, conceive, synthesize ideas and assimilate them into everyday life only proves that the human form is an ‘efficient tool’; it doesn’t mean that the form gives the ability to make independent decisions. The mechanism for the illusory sense of free-will is time coordinated low reccesive and saturating repercussion of post-recursive reflexes. Hence, humans have gained the ability to make seeming independent decision from experiences. Like the human form, all existing forms and concepts transduce; transceive, adopt, adapt and have symbiotic capacitance. The only difference is that they respond to, and relay their subliminal experiences varyingly while time determines choices. But time so often presents trick options that include Time-Agent-Provocateur (warmonger). When choice is not in harmony with time, it becomes a catalyst for chaos.

An individual’s pre-statutory status achievements in so many fields are inconsequential in relation to governing a nation. The pre-requisites for succeeding as a head of government are physical and practical ingenuity, and fundamentally, the harmony with ambience and time. Excessive wealth acquisition, fame and influence aren’t achievements, but accompaniments, or gains. Hence, fame or excessive wealth acquisition cannot be used to prefigure the success of a representative in the management of a nation. The unwaveringly absolute approbation and support for the rule of law; the approbation and the resolute readiness of appointed representatives to be sent to ‘the gallows’ if at any point, they breach the law must be the only consideration when selecting people for managerial appointments in government. Compassion or kindness of a person isn’t requisite for good governance. Moderation is the pivot of life equilibrium while life drifts on excess to the edge of the precipice. People can only cordially coexist when they understand life and themselves. Although Time coerces people to breach the law, the persistent act of kindness and compassion that people often anticipate are also culpable. In fact, without law, no one can describe virtue (virtue is an illusion), nor call anyone a criminal. Morality and crime are defined by law; and we are only able to describe some actions and responses as moral or immoral because of the subjectivity of human laws and the consistent indoctrination.

One doesn’t need to be appointed to a position in government to make a positive and overwhelming impact on any society. Everyone cannot have the chance to have the brief as head of government. On the other hand, nearly everyone must be fully inducted into the running of a state. But a competitive system of governance is retrogressive. In addition, it’s illogical to allow political parties to set and run a state with subjective manifestos. A state must have basic plans and common developmental goals of which all groups and unions should rationally and inventively work to achieve. Sovereignty must be determined by equity. All we claim as rights come through an explicable providence, the legality of  which is fundamental to harmonious co-existence. Freedom is  not gained from the creation of a separate state. Freedom is not a  non-constraint on excessive dreams and adventure, nor is it the right to  make speeches with no responsibility. The right to vote and to be voted for isn’t analogous to freedom. Freedom is statutory; it›s gained only  through a non-biased law and equal treatment of all before the law. Thus, people are only free when nobody, at no time, is above the law, not even the  one they have appointed to head the state.

Ishmael writes in via psychspry@gmail.com