You are here

Contrasting fantasies of singularity and plurality


Law and Order vs. Lore and Orders? (Part #7)


[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]


The variety implied by the above considerations is variously apprehended in practice -- in widely contrasting ways which are partially enabled by individual and collective imagination.

Law and order as imagined by government: The processes of governance are necessarily highly entangled with how law and order are imagined, elaborated and enforced by government -- and so framed in engaging with the public.The body of law is understood as a singularity, whether or not it is recognized as a body composed of a multiplicity of laws -- to which additions and modifications are made through the legislative process. It is through such law that order is framed and enforced. For government, law and order is of its own making and the legitimating framework for its action. The withholding of action to those in need may well be framed in terms of the overriding "rule of law".

The framework is typically extended or projected in the power relations between states -- notably in aspiration to greater relative power. This is especially to be seen in collective preoccupation within the US with its identity as a superpower, and how this is to be perpetuated at any cost. The culture of "Being Number One" is used as a justification for ever increasing military expenditure. The underlying belief, echoed in the argument below, is succinctly embodied in the slogan: There can be only one.

This belief is fundamental to a prevalent understanding of leadership, even to be interpreted as its definition. There can be only one leader. Hence the imaginal socio-political fantasies associated with "the most powerful man in the world" -- "Our Leader ! ".

Law and order, as imagined by government, are necessarily much challenged -- if not existentially challenged -- by other ways in which each may be imagined, as suggested above (Cultivating Global Strategic Fantasies of Choice: learnings from Islamic Al-Qaida and the Republican Tea Party movement, 2010). The existence of other forms of "nongovernmental" and "informal" organization may be equally challenging to some countries, as has been the case with respect to "NGOs", "multinational corporations", "liberation movements" and "organized crime" (Interacting Fruitfully with Un-Civil Society: the dilemma for non-civil society organizations, 1996).

Lore and order as imagined by the people: The imagination of the people is variously evoked and evident in the following:

Online games, including Battlefield 2, Halo 3, Counter-Strike, and Call of Duty: Black Ops, are notably used by the military to train operatives in conditions resembling those currently so evident in Syria. Some have been developed with financial assistance from the military for that purpose. Millions can engage on a nightly basis in "jihad", "crusades", or their containment -- encouraged, enabled and empowered by online gaming lore.

Arguably there is far greater imaginative engagement with such games throughout the world than with current media coverage of the conflict in Syria. People achieve greater imaginative control over the dynamics and realities of street fighting in "Syria" via such realistic role-playing simulations than through the hypocritical arguments of the leadership of the international community ensuring the supply of arms to that arena.

It is appropriate to note that lore is valuable and meaningful to individuals precisely through the manner in which it gives depth to self-esteem and to personal engagement with experiential psychosocial reality -- however that is interpreted. This may well be associated with fantasies analogous to that mentioned above -- of "being number one".

Lore and orders as a pattern of habit: There is a case for recognizing lore as constituting an unexamined worldview with which engagement is essentially unconscious. As such it conditions behaviour rather than offering guidelines to be consciously recognized -- to be explained as "how things are done", and by implication, "how they ought to be done". Whilst this may be deprecated as a characteristic of tribal society, the role of "lore" in institutional socialization merits careful attention in the light of the arguments of John Ralston Saul (The Unconscious Civilization, 1995). The term could be seen as an appropriate descriptor of what is deliberately instilled, implanted or inculcated in many educational environments and other institutions. As such it may be most evident as an habitual pattern of response to situations -- characteristic of a particular mindset or "style" -- whether of Ivory League universities, military academies, or major corporations.

Such unconscious habitual response is problematically related to authority and the interpretation of "orders" rather than "order". Institutions instil an unquestionable obedience to orders and due process as a desirable trait. The consequence is evident in the fatalities in the extreme cases of Adolf Eichmann, with respect to the Nazi hierarchy, and of Kofi Annan, with respect to the UN hierarchy (Perplexing Symmetries in Obedience to Orders: equivalencies in the moral abdication of Adolf Eichmann and Kofi Annan? 1998).


[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]