My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: November 15th, 2014, 9:06 pm
My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
I'm toying around with the idea of whether a liberal stratocracy would be a better form of government than the common liberal democracies. My issue with democracies is that:
1. The majority of voters are not educated enough to know whether their decisions will actually be beneficial in the long-term.
2. Ruling a people is best left to those with intelligence, skill, and wisdom, who are by definition in the minority. The majority is easily swayed by specious rhetoric, and the majority is fickle. Winning an election does not mean you are skilled, intelligent, or wise, it means you are a good orator.
3. The masses would gladly vote themselves wealth from the public treasury, by eliminating all taxes and having all their wants and needs provided for. The end result is bankruptcy and chaos. See California.
Freedom is the most noble goal, but having freedom and being able to vote on government leaders and policies are not synonymous. Freedom means you can pursue happiness and life without unreasonable interference from anyone.
Turning a chaotic nation into a free one cannot be done overnight. A country first requires law before it can have freedom. It requires security before it can have law. And it requires peace before it can have security.
1. Peace: The military aggressor must be either defeated by any means necessary, or unconditionally surrendered to. If the nation wins, proceed to step 2. If not...good luck with your captors.
2. Security: Martial order should be declared to secure the nation. The military commander or junta should take care to only create general orders that are practically enforceable, and quickly crush any systemic resistance or widespread private coercion, i.e. civil disobedience and organized crime, respectively, via any means necessary.
3. Law: Once the military has suppressed all civil disobedience and organized crime, it should at once codify its operating principles and values into a constitution and its general orders into laws, to render it's actions predictable and consistent. If official actions are lawful, they are predictable. If they are predictable, a rational person can avoid infringing them. The individual will now have the invaluable boon of being safe from the arbitrary whims of the military commanders, and from independent criminals. Habeas corpus shall now be enacted.
4. Freedom: Now that the state has achieved its objectives of creating a peaceful, secure, and lawful nation where its citizens can walk at night without fear, it can now ensure true social and economic freedom with a low risk of it degenerating into anarchy. It can now minimize its intrusions and interventions, and just let the people do what they want as long as they don't try to overthrow the government or violate the natural rights of others.
Some suggestions: 1. Upon the progression to stage 3, all citizens at that time who either hold land, are current or former military, own a business, hold academic positions, or are professionals, are issued a certificate that entitles them the right to vote for a seven-member Supreme Commission for Peace and Development, which will serve as Head of State. No new certificates may be issued. The members of the Commission will include at least two general/flag officers, one business executive, one academic, one physician, one lawyer, and one engineer. The members will have no ability to campaign for the position, their membership lasts until they resign, die, or retire from their occupation. Their election will be by single-transferable vote.
2. The deliberations of the Commission will be broadcast on national TV. The Supreme Commission for Peace and Development will appoint a headhunter to find a Chief Martial Law Administrator, who may be either a general or a business executive. The Chief Martial Law Administrator is all-powerful, but s/he serves during the confidence of the Commission and they may remove him/her for any reason.
3. The Chief Martial Law Administrator will take care to issue decrees that are practically enforceable, and questions of their application will be referred to the courts-martial.
4. Each city and its surrounding area will be administered by a captain assisted by a first lieutenant. Each county will be administered by a lieutenant colonel assisted by a major. Each region will be administered by a brigadier general assisted by a colonel. Regional commanders report directly to the Chief Martial Law Administrator. The area administer will be only responsible for maintaining the peace and enforcing law and order. Infractions are dealt with by the city. Misdemeanors are dealt with by the county. Felonies are dealt with by the region.
5. No jury trials. Juries are easily confused, manipulated, and tampered with. Infractions are always dealt with by the arresting MP unless the defendant wishes for a summary court-martial to be convened by the local area administrator, misdemeanors are dealt with by summary court-martial, but the defendant can refuse, in which case a special court-martial, consisting of three military justices assigned to the county, will be convened. Felonies always dealt with by special court martial, unless the defendant refuses, in which case a general court-martial, consisting of five military justices assigned to the region, will be convened. Treason is always dealt with by the Commission, but the chief military justice will preside over the trial. Defendants have the right to appeal to the next higher court-martial except in cases of infractions. A general court-martial can be appealed to the Supreme Commission for Peace and Development, and it's decisions are final.
The defendant in a criminal case has a right to an attorney in special courts-martial and higher, and in all cases has the right to not self-incriminate, and the right to call and cross-examine witnesses, and has the right to an Alford plea. Either side may request a summary judgment in both civil and criminal cases if they feel there is no factual dispute. Civil cases are dealt with by private arbitration, and the awards of the tribunal have the force of a final judgment, unless manifest injustice can be proved, in which case the award can be appealed to a special court-martial, which may or may not decide to conduct a new trial. All trials and arbitrations will be broadcast in real-time on national TV, and their judgments and awards will be published. Any citizen who is defending a felony case or major civil case may appeal directly to the Chief Martial Law Administrator from the court-martial of first instance or arbitration tribunal.
6. Imprisonment is not an option for punishment. Prisons do not reform, they harden, and they are very expensive. Infractions are dealt with by fines alone. Misdemeanors are dealt with by house arrest (only movement between home and school/work allowed) and/or fines. Felonies (including violating house arrest) are dealt with by public flogging, combined with fines and/or forfeiture. Crimes such as major fraud, murder, rape, robbery, burglary, and inciting riots are dealt with by exile (those who are exiled will be microchipped and branded), combined with forfeiture of all property (which will be split between the state and any victims as judged by the court-martial). Returning from exile, or treason, is punished by death and forfeiture of estate to the state.
7. The only tax will be a land value tax. It is impossible to evade an LVT, it discourages wasting and speculatively holding land, it encourages development, and it will be paid mostly by those wealthy enough to own land.
8. After 5 years, a percentage of any tax surplus will be given to the certificate-holders as a dividend. After 10 years, the certificates will become freely-transferable between individuals only, and only one certificate can be owned by an individual.
9. The currency should be backed by electricity, which will allow the money supply to expand and contract as needed based on technological progress, and ensure economic stability. The Chief Martial Law Administrator will select a guaranteed price of electricity (e.g. $0.20/kWh) and a desired free-market electricity price range (e.g. $0.10/kWh-$0.15/kWh). If the free-market price of electricity goes below the bottom of the range, the Chief Martial Law Administrator will lower the LVT, increase welfare and subsidies, and expand government services, and order the central bank to buy securities and government debt to inflate the money supply to raise the price of electricity back in range. If the free-market price of electricity goes above the top of the range, the Chief Martial Law Administrator will raise the LVT, decrease welfare and subsidies, and decrease government services, and order the central bank to sell securities and government debt to deflate the money supply to lower the free-market price of electricity.
If the price of electricity ever goes above the guaranteed price, once the price of electricity goes back in range, the government will also reimburse the difference between the free-market price during that time, and the guaranteed price.
This will require any business or individual who owns electricity generating equipment to have load balancing equipment so the power generated can be fed back into the grid.
10. All those who turn 18 must complete two years of paid military service. Those who do not fit military requirements or refuse to serve in the military instead are required to serve in healthcare, education, farming, energy production, caring for the young or old, or ministry, depending on their aptitude and desires.
11. Immigrants can only receive citizenship through 20 years of military service, and when they complete it they get a grant of land as well (along with all others who successfully complete 20 years of military service). Otherwise, they have the same rights and responsibilities, except that they cannot vote to elect members of the Supreme Commission for Peace and Development, or run for the membership.
12. Those who are not either gainfully-employed, independently-wealthy, or a well-supervised dependent of another, including all temporary visitors, are tagged with an anklet that continuously reports their position to the authorities.
13. Those who are unable to work are moved to secure centers (with any dependent family as well), with full Internet access, TV, basic entertainment, food, healthcare etc.
14. All residents who have not been convicted of a violent crime are able to own arms, but must report any use in self-defense immediately to the local authorities.
What do you think? The government's goal will be to maximize property values and encourage technological progress, as that results in maximum tax revenue, and all governments like money. Living in a country with high property values and high technological progress would be great, right?
The Chief Martial Law Administrator obviously wants to appear strong and in command. Creating needless conflict and anger is a sign of weakness, of insecurity. Therefore, if she or he wants to remain in good graces with Commission and not waste the citizens' money putting down rebellions, they will avoid provoking rebellions.
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
Let me try to rebut this premise by reductio ad absurdum using the top online argument cliche: Was Hitler intelligent? Was he unskillful? Or was he unwise?TSLexi wrote:2. Ruling a people is best left to those with intelligence, skill, and wisdom
I disagree. I believe, as said by the first man to call himself an anarchist, that liberty is the mother not the daughter of order. In other words, I believe freedom leads to peace and security, not vice versa.TSLexi wrote:A country first requires law before it can have freedom. It requires security before it can have law. And it requires peace before it can have security.
And thus--while interestingly thought-out--rests the problem with the ideal political structure you describe. It requires powerful government forces and "chiefs" to implement it. History teaches us that power corrupts and that the people entrusted with power to do what you want done in your ideal society will use the power for self-serving purposes, namely to give themselves more wealth and power.
I believe no man can be trusted with such power. No man can be trusted to rule over other men. When that principle is carried out it leads to something that could be kind of described as a 'liberal stratocracy' (e.g. a society in which a wouldbe rapist would be met with defensive force to prevent his infringing on the wouldbe victim's freedom) but is better known simply as anarchism.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: November 15th, 2014, 9:06 pm
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
The goal of the Commission is to appoint a Dictator who will make them the most money. You can make the most money by being providing almost no services and extracting high taxes, but then you constantly have to worry about revolts and coups. Dictators who fear those become very oppressive, because they are not secure in their power. And eventually this system will burn out.
If the Commission and Dictator want to maintain power and extract the most wealth over the longest period of time, they must keep the population happy and prosperous.
If the people receive free high quality healthcare, free high quality education, have a hard currency that retains its purchasing power, can pretty much do anything they want as long as they pay their taxes (and due to the land value tax, the tax burden will fall on those who have the most ability to pay, i.e. those who own large amounts of land, and the government has every incentive to increase property values) and don't revolt, and have security, the Dictator and Commission will remain in power because nobody in their right mind would want to overthrow them and lose everything.
Can you really have true liberty if there is no order? If you were constantly frightened that someone might kill you or rob you, would there really be liberated?
Caesar Augustus was Emperor of Rome, and had unlimited power. Under his rule, Rome went from a city of brick to a city of marble.
The President/CEO of a company has absolute power over it's affairs. They know the board can remove them if they do anything to decrease the value of the company. It's the exact same situation here.
-
- Posts: 1500
- Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 4:57 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eric Hoffer
- Location: California, US
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
The original poster's concept is that only people of substance should be allowed to vote. The problem with having that subset of the nation or community have the power to select the decision-makers is that obviously those people of substance would select representatives who favored the people of substance, and their decisions would create a two-tier populace. Hard to imagine that wealth inequality would get much worse than it is today, but it would result in not only wealth inequality but social inequality as well. Nobility and serfs.
The idea that we can do without prisons in favor of banishment is weird. Where would the banished criminals go? To infect another country? To an island of the banished, where the strongest dominate the weak? The fact that our criminal justice system is far from perfect doesn't mean that you dream up a solution that would be worse.
I think the original poster's point of view is that the governments of today are so flawed that there must be a dramatically better system if we can just craft one. My view is that the representative democracies of today are rather awful but better than any of the alternatives.
- Above us only sky
- Posts: 361
- Joined: February 12th, 2012, 9:03 am
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: November 15th, 2014, 9:06 pm
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
- Above us only sky
- Posts: 361
- Joined: February 12th, 2012, 9:03 am
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
If I don't want a general to be the president, I want the freedom of the press so I can publish a book critisizing the liberal stratocracy, can that " liberal stratocracy' fulfill my wishs?
There is only one form of democracy, and that must be liberal, if it is not liberal, then it is not democracy or it is just half-democracy.
-
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: October 18th, 2012, 5:30 am
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
The original Athenian democracy was far from liberal, being half the population were women and therefore didn't get the vote, and slavery was the norm.
The two biggest problem I have with the idea of a Stratocracy is that firstly - Sparta was perhaps the most famous one and Greece never recovered from it.
Secondly - what makes you think that 'intelligence' is a prime requisite for governance?? Or that military minds have the right kind of intelligence to successfully run a country? Perhaps you could find out what the Burmese think of it?
Arguably you want a middle ground where the rulers are not so thick as to be taken advantage and not so clever that they think they can take everyone for a ride.
On this topic I'd mention that one of the biggest problems for modern democracies is the purposeful over complexification of legislation.
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: November 15th, 2014, 9:06 pm
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
I believe my system would not be a stratocracy, but more of an elective dictatorship.Above us only sky wrote:Hello, TSLexi! If you think there can be a liberal stratocracy, please define "stratocracy". stratocracy and liberalism is like fire and ice. stracracy is about control, and a liberal government, as you said, is about "letting people do what they want".
If I don't want a general to be the president, I want the freedom of the press so I can publish a book critisizing the liberal stratocracy, can that " liberal stratocracy' fulfill my wishs?
There is only one form of democracy, and that must be liberal, if it is not liberal, then it is not democracy or it is just half-democracy.
If the dictator wants to remain in power under this system, he or she must optimize the return of the voting certificate holders. That basically includes making sure that we have enough energy to support our civilization, and making sure our currency is hard, and our economy takes off.
Maximizing the civilization's energy efficiency and using energy sources with high ERoEI is paramount, for when those decline, collapse is near.
Using thorium nuclear reactors for electricity, backing the currency with the energy generated from the thorium, ordering that all products report the energy used in their production, and ordering all energy commodity futures be priced in terms of energy (i.e. $/GJ), will solve that. Tax revenue can be raised by assessing land value tax of a certain percentage once per year.
The dictator can then place half of that revenue into a trust fund, with the trustee being a successful global financier, the trustor being the country, and the beneficiary being every citizen, and 80% of the returns can be distributed to the citizens.
Once those are solved, the people can be left alone. Unhappy people don't produce or consume as much as happy people. Happy people attract other people to come live there. More people living in an area raises land values. Higher land values mean greater tax revenue.
Also, criticism is different from advocating insurrection. Criticism is fine. Advocating insurrection is not. I don't like Obama, but I don't say things like "we should march on the White House and drag him out."
-
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: October 18th, 2012, 5:30 am
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
I remember Mrs T in the UK and after the next election in the USA I'm pretty sure we'll see a Republican President with a majority in both houses ... basically dictatorships.
However, the fact that you're happy to put restrictions upon the actions of the dictator while at the same time suggesting what they should or shouldn't do implies that your interest lies more in having a puppet while you pull the strings.
It's part of the definition of a dictator that they get to do what they want and no one gets to tell them what to do!
That's why in principle and in reality Dictators are extremely bad at running countries ... Pol Pot, Stalin, Nkrumah, Napoleon, Gaddafi ... not a single good word can be said about any of them as they all absolutely failed their countries.
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: November 15th, 2014, 9:06 pm
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
How was he unwise? What did do that was unwise? What evidence do you have that he was unwise? If he was so unwise, how did he climb to power in Germany so effectively? How did such an unwise man do such a good job of not only getting democratically elected but then concentrating power so well into government?TSLexi wrote:Hitler was unwise.
I believe there are many, many people who are just as nasty if not more nasty than Hitler. What makes a guy like Hitler so awfully and sickeningly dangerous is that he is so wise, so clever, so good at working his way to the top.
This seems like the setup to a false dichotomy, and one that also happens to be rebutted by history itself. History is filled with examples of political systems in which the leadership does an effective job of oppressing the masses to enrich the wealthy class, but also provide enough kickbacks to keep everything running. Just because being the most awful meanest dictator in the world woudln't work well, doesn't mean that the polar opposite would be the most effective way to enrichen the few.TSLexi wrote:The goal of the Commission is to appoint a Dictator who will make them the most money. You can make the most money by being providing almost no services and extracting high taxes, but then you constantly have to worry about revolts and coups. Dictators who fear those become very oppressive, because they are not secure in their power. And eventually this system will burn out.
If the Commission and Dictator want to maintain power and extract the most wealth over the longest period of time, they must keep the population happy and prosperous.
Those with the most ability to pay do not end up paying because they use their wealth and power to influence the government and political system.TSLexi wrote:If the people receive free high quality healthcare, free high quality education, have a hard currency that retains its purchasing power, can pretty much do anything they want as long as they pay their taxes (and due to the land value tax, the tax burden will fall on those who have the most ability to pay, i.e. those who own large amounts of land, and the government has every incentive to increase property values) and don't revolt, and have security, the Dictator and Commission will remain in power because nobody in their right mind would want to overthrow them and lose everything.
Also, people whether in their right mind or not would definitely be willing to try to overthrow the dictatorship probably to replace it with their own so that they can have the power and money for themselves. People do not behave as utilitarians. The kind of people who fight for the power of being dictator are not going to be dissuaded by a universal healthcare system.
Anarchy is order, so no. But I believe liberty begets order, not vice versa.TSLexi wrote:Can you really have true liberty if there is no order?
If you are being killed and robbed then you are not free. Since offensive violence begets violence, and since infringements on freedom and the ensuing so-called 'injustice' begets violence, such a scenario would lead to even more disorder. Freedom is the mother of order; the initiation of violence is the mother of disorder--despite the fact that those confusingly thinking that 'order is the mother of liberty' try to use the initiation of violence like murder and robbery to allegedly create order.TSLexi wrote:If you were constantly frightened that someone might kill you or rob you, would there really be liberated?
Good for Caesar; Bad for the slaves.TSLexi wrote:Caesar Augustus was Emperor of Rome, and had unlimited power. Under his rule, Rome went from a city of brick to a city of marble.
I'd rather the kings not enjoy marble and I am free than be a poor, maltreated slave so that the kings can enjoy even more luxury.
The first two sentences seem to contradict. Who's the boss? The CEO or the board? The thing about absolute power is that it is absolute.TSLexi wrote:The President/CEO of a company has absolute power over it's affairs. They know the board can remove them if they do anything to decrease the value of the company. It's the exact same situation here.
-- Updated 27 Nov 2014 10:09 pm to add the following --
That's kind of how it works now. Obama is the head of the executive branch of government; and the E in CEO stands for executive.TSLexi wrote:Okay, the Dictator is more like a CEO then.
Unfortunately, the executive and the people pulling his strings like a puppet do not do what is best from some kind of utilitarian point of view; they manipulate the voting masses while making decisions that benefit themselves and a minority of special interests. The democracy or liberal stratocracy or whatever really is just a farce cover for an oligarchy. Granted, as you wisely point out, the powers that be don't do what is worst for the rest of us because that is not what is best for them since we would revolt. They let just enough trickle-down to enough of the rest of us to prevent rebellion, minimized with propaganda and political manipulation, but still do what is best for the few not the many let alone the all.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
-
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: October 18th, 2012, 5:30 am
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
I'm not at all convinced that Hitler was wise. I suspect that in fact he was of average intelligence and of a psychopathic disposition. i.e. he could be very convincing and charismatic ... standard traits of Blue Chip CEO's.Scott wrote:How was he unwise? What did do that was unwise? What evidence do you have that he was unwise? If he was so unwise, how did he climb to power in Germany so effectively? How did such an unwise man do such a good job of not only getting democratically elected but then concentrating power so well into government?TSLexi wrote:Hitler was unwise.
But saying Hitler was wise begs far too many questions about why he brought Germany to the brink of Bankruptcy in his rush to rearm. Why didn't he trade more effectively with the Axis powers? Why didn't he (apart from Czech's) integrate the captured economies instead of just plundering the banks and enslaving the people?
Was it really a wise move to switch from winning the battle of britain to hitting the cities and losing it? Was it really wise to take his eye off capturing Moscow and ultimately losing millions of men? Was it really wise to wait until well into the war before switching to a war economy?
I think if any lesson is to be taken from such people as Hitler that would be that history doesn't revolve around the brightest and the best, but that seemingly ordinary people of average intelligence can have a disproportionate impact on world events. Manson another average no account and otherwise indistinguishable person managed through a few murders to capture the attention - and adoration - of far too many people.
The failing then falls on those that listen and are taken in by such people and of course those that hope to gain from being associated with such. Bullies are rarely the most intelligent or wise, they're just good at manipulation.
-
- Posts: 244
- Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 10:55 am
- Contact:
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
This means that we have to have a basic understanding of those natures and their relativity to each other.
Our society is mostly a slow evolution from the status quo, as those with power usually resist giving it up.
I say, power to the people. Tear down the cities. Change priorities from material wealth to spiritual happiness and contentment. Stop duplication of effort, spread the wealth.
I have a detailed plan to accomplish this but I will not go there now.
The main idea that I wanted to suggest here, is related to a general change in the pattern of leadership, to encourage more changes towards an idealized goal of world peace and unity.
Right now, the world is being threatened by Muslim extremists. Why are they such a serious problem? Because they have a long-term goal. Everyone knows that to gain world harmony, there must be a common thread of attachment to all individuals. Each person must feel like a part of this family of man. Does this end justify any means? I am not going there, right now either.
But my point is, we will never win against this Muslim world-takeover by trying to "kill it off". We will only suppress it, until its numbers build and it returns to continue the path of the long term goal.
The only way to win against this threat (motivated by a long term goal) is to create the vision of a BETTER long term goal.
We need visionary leadership, that empowers the individual's feeling of connection with the goal. We can learn much from our supposedly "lower" forms of life neighbors...flocks, prides, herds, schools, all sorts of group behavior models in nature.
We will devise a scheme that keeps communities organized on a human neighborhood scale. Where interpersonal relationships really can be personal. A portion of each community should be devoted to transient populations. Allowing people to move freely between communities.
This sounds like a pipe dream, to tear down and start over and would be impossible without a totalitarian ruler dictating so. But maybe there is another way. I say that way is long range goals. Long range goals internalized by the citizens of the planet.
The thing about man-made structure is it is always gaining entropy and has a life-span. We build highway systems, then continually rebuild them. We need to keep man-made structure to a minimum. And once a structure fails it is not re-made unless it fits the long range goals.
-- Updated December 14th, 2014, 8:11 am to add the following --
Our reality exists because of a structure of relativity organized by a continuum. It is this continuum that allows the evolution of complexity.
In other words, if we had to keep starting over, we would never have become what we have become or what we will become in the future.
We need society to mimic nature. It needs to provide a framework for directed human effort...
Let me say this another way, our current directionless society says, go out there and make your own path to wealth and happiness, get yours before somebody else gets it..
Whereas the ideal society says, here are the pathways (determined by long range goals) that we need worked on. Which path looks most inviting for directing your efforts (efforts directed to improving mankind's society)?
Make you own path vs. here are the pre-planned paths.
Starting over each time vs. a continuum of refinement
-
- Posts: 220
- Joined: September 6th, 2014, 4:33 pm
Re: My idea for a liberal stratocracy.
Sounds like you are trying to achieve contradictory goals. The people want cities and material wealth and are too low a level to understand duplication of effort, so giving them power undermines your objective. Then you value spreading the wealth that you no longer value...AB1OB wrote:I say, power to the people. Tear down the cities. Change priorities from material wealth to spiritual happiness and contentment. Stop duplication of effort, spread the wealth.
The future is going to move quite fast. If you have a slow moving plan your plan will be overtaken by other forces.
I'm not so sure that Islam has a long term plan though - they have a vision - but the steps they take are not good ones for achieving the vision they have. I think in the long run they are doomed to fail although they could cause a bit of harm on the way.
Anyway in regard to being overtaken by history - probably a Chinese lead world will deal with the threat more effectively than a US lead one.
Do you mean like how the US tried to spread democracy in Iraq / Afghanistan?way to win against this threat (motivated by a long term goal) is to create the vision of a BETTER long term goal.
The degree of force required to achieve such internalization would be immense. How you acquire all that power for your use would be the interesting thing.I say that way is long range goals. Long range goals internalized by the citizens of the planet.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023