Tweet
Back to the elephant in the room that some would rather not discuss 
Over the years, we've touched on various aspects of this problem. One aspect that I want to touch on is more of a symptom of the slave mentality, but one that will help us better understand both what the slave mentality is and how it can be overcome.
This symptom is the support of oppressive regimes. In recent times, this symptom has reared its ugly head on the MTO forum. Whether people support oppressive regimes because they genuinely believe that that particular political system is a much better one at organising the state and regulating relations between its citizens or whether they are simply supportive because that particular regime is "sticking it" to what they view as an evil imperialist America is irrelevant, the underlying reasons - suffering from a slave mentality – is what continues to plague Macedonians worldwide and the results of it are well known, including authoritarian governments in Macedonia who act as vassals for foreign powers rather than representatives of Macedonian interests.
It is almost incomprehensible that a human being would willingly support an oppressive regime for whatever reason. Some of the regimes that have garnered favourable opinion on this forum include those of Iran, Libya and North Korea. Another popular one is that of Russia. Much of this support comes from misguided individuals who actually live in liberal democratic states. Perhaps they just don't understand the genuine repression that millions of individuals experience on a daily basis in these countries? What is even more mind-boggling is that they then accuse the very liberal democratic states in which they live of being oppressive, yet they are blind to the irony that they are able to freely express these views without being killed, imprisoned, tortured or experiencing more "subtle" forms of repression such as loss of employment or official discrimination against them or their families.
The key differences between liberal democratic states such as the United States and Australia and oppressive regimes such as those mentioned earlier, is in who ultimately hold political power and how that power is used. In states such as Iran, North Korea and Russia, a small circle of elites is the sovereign, much like the monarch and his lords in the Middle Ages and the Persian Gulf states today. In states such as the United States and Australia, the body of citizens is the sovereign. That means that the body of citizens is the ultimate decision-maker and all political power resides with them. The other difference is the end purpose of political power. In oppressive regimes it is to perpetuate the power of the regime. In liberal democracies it is to uphold the natural inalienable rights and responsibilities of the each individual citizen and work for their collective benefit. Although this does not always happen in practice, the political freedom that we enjoy and the political institutions and structures that we have, ensure that it does happen in the vast majority of instances.
On a historical note, which has been discussed but not understood by some on this forum, it is because of the American colonists that we even have liberal democratic and republican systems, amongst other fundamental institutions and structures, today. It was Christians who left Europe because of persecution in the early 17th century who understood our natural inalienable rights more than any other group. They settled in what is now the United States and formed their own democratic governance systems to govern their colonies and regulate relations between individuals on both political and economic matters. In essence, they were the first to reject the notion that sovereignty lies with a hereditary monarch and established the first democratic and republican system in which sovereignty laid with the body of citizens. The ill-informed among us will claim that this would have eventually happened anyway, but this is not necessarily the case and the fact of the matter remains that it was the Americans that did it. In addition, a number of very specific circumstances combined to allow them to achieve this (these require detailed analysis and it is not relevant to this particular post).
Criticism of liberal democratic states as being “oppressive” is usually levelled by people who, on the one hand, have never experienced oppression in their lives and on the other hand, have made no attempt to engage politically on either the local, state or federal levels, or within their own communities. In fact, many of these people would not have the slightest idea of how to even engage in the political process, have no idea how it works or how and by whom it is and can be influenced. They just make the assumption that some faceless “corporate elites” run the world according to their own interests. This is not only insane, but flies in the face of logic and the multitude of competing interests among “corporate elites” themselves. Regardless, this is also irrelevant to the topic at hand.
The opportunities for political participation in liberal democracies are endless and the governments of these states are constantly seeking participation from each and every citizen – in fact, it is a RESPONSIBILITY that each Australian citizen is EXPECTED to meet. Further, liberal democracies, while not perfect, in the vast majority of instances protect the inalienable rights of their citizens.
What are these rights? The most relevant to Macedonians include the rights to freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the freedom to make your own decisions. Most Macedonians still have not realised that they hold these inalienable rights, and if they have, they still have not grasped their significance, dismissing them as some useless philosophical ideals that have no practical use in real life. Its amazing how they can dismiss what is right in front of them! The political and economic freedom, and the prosperity that comes with it, compared to the political and economic oppression and the results that stem from that!
Its an absolute shame that some people support oppressive regimes and their violation of these rights. But it is ultimately a symptom of the slave mentality. Ultimately, these people believe that these rights either don’t exist (which is ludicrous) or that they should not (which is worse). The great irony is that they exercise these rights in their attempt to deny them.
Over the years, we've touched on various aspects of this problem. One aspect that I want to touch on is more of a symptom of the slave mentality, but one that will help us better understand both what the slave mentality is and how it can be overcome.
This symptom is the support of oppressive regimes. In recent times, this symptom has reared its ugly head on the MTO forum. Whether people support oppressive regimes because they genuinely believe that that particular political system is a much better one at organising the state and regulating relations between its citizens or whether they are simply supportive because that particular regime is "sticking it" to what they view as an evil imperialist America is irrelevant, the underlying reasons - suffering from a slave mentality – is what continues to plague Macedonians worldwide and the results of it are well known, including authoritarian governments in Macedonia who act as vassals for foreign powers rather than representatives of Macedonian interests.
It is almost incomprehensible that a human being would willingly support an oppressive regime for whatever reason. Some of the regimes that have garnered favourable opinion on this forum include those of Iran, Libya and North Korea. Another popular one is that of Russia. Much of this support comes from misguided individuals who actually live in liberal democratic states. Perhaps they just don't understand the genuine repression that millions of individuals experience on a daily basis in these countries? What is even more mind-boggling is that they then accuse the very liberal democratic states in which they live of being oppressive, yet they are blind to the irony that they are able to freely express these views without being killed, imprisoned, tortured or experiencing more "subtle" forms of repression such as loss of employment or official discrimination against them or their families.
The key differences between liberal democratic states such as the United States and Australia and oppressive regimes such as those mentioned earlier, is in who ultimately hold political power and how that power is used. In states such as Iran, North Korea and Russia, a small circle of elites is the sovereign, much like the monarch and his lords in the Middle Ages and the Persian Gulf states today. In states such as the United States and Australia, the body of citizens is the sovereign. That means that the body of citizens is the ultimate decision-maker and all political power resides with them. The other difference is the end purpose of political power. In oppressive regimes it is to perpetuate the power of the regime. In liberal democracies it is to uphold the natural inalienable rights and responsibilities of the each individual citizen and work for their collective benefit. Although this does not always happen in practice, the political freedom that we enjoy and the political institutions and structures that we have, ensure that it does happen in the vast majority of instances.
On a historical note, which has been discussed but not understood by some on this forum, it is because of the American colonists that we even have liberal democratic and republican systems, amongst other fundamental institutions and structures, today. It was Christians who left Europe because of persecution in the early 17th century who understood our natural inalienable rights more than any other group. They settled in what is now the United States and formed their own democratic governance systems to govern their colonies and regulate relations between individuals on both political and economic matters. In essence, they were the first to reject the notion that sovereignty lies with a hereditary monarch and established the first democratic and republican system in which sovereignty laid with the body of citizens. The ill-informed among us will claim that this would have eventually happened anyway, but this is not necessarily the case and the fact of the matter remains that it was the Americans that did it. In addition, a number of very specific circumstances combined to allow them to achieve this (these require detailed analysis and it is not relevant to this particular post).
Criticism of liberal democratic states as being “oppressive” is usually levelled by people who, on the one hand, have never experienced oppression in their lives and on the other hand, have made no attempt to engage politically on either the local, state or federal levels, or within their own communities. In fact, many of these people would not have the slightest idea of how to even engage in the political process, have no idea how it works or how and by whom it is and can be influenced. They just make the assumption that some faceless “corporate elites” run the world according to their own interests. This is not only insane, but flies in the face of logic and the multitude of competing interests among “corporate elites” themselves. Regardless, this is also irrelevant to the topic at hand.
The opportunities for political participation in liberal democracies are endless and the governments of these states are constantly seeking participation from each and every citizen – in fact, it is a RESPONSIBILITY that each Australian citizen is EXPECTED to meet. Further, liberal democracies, while not perfect, in the vast majority of instances protect the inalienable rights of their citizens.
What are these rights? The most relevant to Macedonians include the rights to freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the freedom to make your own decisions. Most Macedonians still have not realised that they hold these inalienable rights, and if they have, they still have not grasped their significance, dismissing them as some useless philosophical ideals that have no practical use in real life. Its amazing how they can dismiss what is right in front of them! The political and economic freedom, and the prosperity that comes with it, compared to the political and economic oppression and the results that stem from that!
Its an absolute shame that some people support oppressive regimes and their violation of these rights. But it is ultimately a symptom of the slave mentality. Ultimately, these people believe that these rights either don’t exist (which is ludicrous) or that they should not (which is worse). The great irony is that they exercise these rights in their attempt to deny them.
Comment