Published on: Nov 11, 2018 @ 17:56 – The Chinese ritual of executing corrupt politicians and seemingly random billionaires is probably one of the most forward thinking, advanced, and stabilizing institutions in the world today. China has some 250 billionaires, close to 20% of them however have wound up behind bars, with a number of them famously being executed.
But the Chinese public and the media maintains this list of billionaires. Such lists, known as bai fu bang is published in Forbes and its Chinese equivalent Hurun. But popularly these are are known instead as the sha zhu bang: “pigs for slaughter list.”
Imagine that! If the Forbes 500 list was, in the public imagination, something akin to the public execution slate. But we don’t have to imagine. For all practical purposes, in the hearts and minds of average Americans, it already is. The way the elites keep us from positively shaping a culture that engenders an internecine elite execution spree, is our self-immolating, misanthropic culture that focuses on either petty crimes or the opposed social views of other regular, powerless people.
And the United States could learn from China, and hopefully very soon we’ll be seeing these public executions.
Applying Conventional Justice, They Ought to Die
It’s pretty standard to send mass murderers and serial killers to the death chamber. Their actions have caused the immediate and direct, premature loss of lives for others, and did so in a premeditated fashion or with full knowledge of the likelihood of the outcome of these actions would result in death. Criminal negligence is also still a crime.
The modern fields of sociology and economics are approaching their 350th birthday, which means that there are tons of literature immediately available to politicians and robber barons about how societies and economies function. Just like compelling someone to put a fork into an electric socket is a criminal act, so too is compelling voters to vote against their evident self-interest. Likewise, the effects of down-sizing businesses not as a result of automation but in order to place additional work-load onto those ‘lucky’ not to be made redundant are also known. So too is it known the consequences of private health insurance, and doubly so is it known the effects of raising the co-pays and premiums to ungodly, unaffordable sums. Obama-care isn’t much different than insurance companies under the standard HMO scam, in that their aim is to limit care in order to ensure not only ‘cost savings’ but ‘profitability’ for the company.
To be clear, the terms ‘cost savings’ and ‘profitability’ should not be used interchangeably, these are distinct categories that the private healthcare industry mixes wantonly and intentionally, to mislead the C-SPAN watching public. While congress may talk about ‘cost savings’, this should be a crime too, because what they mean is profitability. America needs to affirm that it is a pro-life society, by executing the heads of health insurance companies for their crimes against humanity; that ‘cost-savings’ are relative to the proscribed budget, whereas profitability is an absolute concept. If you owned a retail shop, you’d be ‘saving costs’ by reducing staff, but you may well see a ‘net loss in profits’ if customers as a result couldn’t be sold on (or find) the things you are selling. Likewise, human beings – even in the most cynical model – are essential for governments and businesses for their tax farming potential and productive labor, and their potential to allow the others to be tax farmed and for others to work. Saving grandma’s life allows her to babysit her grandchildren, teach them to read before kindergarten thus lending them a tremendous advantage, inspiring in them hobbies which later in life turn into innovations, and passing along ideas, customs, and cultural practices which otherwise wouldn’t be transmitted through popular culture or from too-busy parents. Grandma’s time also allows the parents to build the economy through their daily work. But beyond the econometrics of healthcare, is the human element. Again, to reaffirm a culture of life, means we must execute murderers. The biggest murderers of all are the billionaires. Thus, we must execute billionaires.
The fact that a reasonable person can connect these two dots, means that any jury would be able to convict a random billionaire. It’s not only murdering five people that can land you the death sentence. Being behind the scenes and calling the shots, and doing the planning, can also land you the same. Therefore, who pulls the trigger is important, but not the defining factor in capital punishment cases. But murdering someone isn’t the only presently-existing criteria for capital punishment in the US.
The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 allows for capital punishment under federal law for drug offenses, because the implicit understanding here is that the negative impact upon society outweighs other considerations relating to the rights of the convicted. These drug charges don’t have to result in any immediately connectable death, much like a bank’s foreclosure on a working family’s home may not be immediately connectable to their freezing to death under a bridge the following winter. But they are still guilty of the impact it had on society, and the innumerable lethal and otherwise destructive outcomes for both any number of individuals specifically, and society in the abstract, on the whole.
Corruption is inevitable, but the answer to corruption isn’t to simply legalize it. There has to be a standard, an ethos, to which society is held, as a standard. It will never be applied perfectly, and naturally some billionaires will survive simply by aiding in the conviction and execution of their adversarial billionaire competitors. We get that.
The point is the sort of mood and promise the ritual execution of random billionaires creates for society, and for its citizens – citizens who increasingly are demanding blood. And blood they must have. We already have the lottery, so why not have a death lottery for those who’ve won the lottery of life? They say it’s better to have lived one day as a lion than a hundred years as a sheep. So let’s put this truism to the test.
This is a good idea, I promise
Let me explain why the US needs to institute ritualized executions of corrupt politicians and ‘random’ billionaires. That would really be the spectacle of ‘draining the swamp’, and it’s one of the most healthy responses to an unhealthy system, that would have a tremendously stabilizing effect on society.
Now, a lot of folks will have the instinct that delving into such public violence is rather instead a depravity to be avoided, and this idea should be countered with the line of thought that there are already too many factors in play that can’t at this point be unwound. It’s the real economic, social, financial, and cultural violence that regular Americans experience everyday at the hands of government and the capitalist class who governs the government, which is already a fact of life. This is already a depravity, but it’s also in addition turned into a very negativistic legitimating ideology that turns citizens against each other. This only serves the ruling class, but doesn’t serve the people. The traditional populist ideology in the US was agrarianism in its rural parts, and labor syndicalism in its industrial centers. These have been overtaken by a media-academia imposed hoax culture war of the people against the people, and only the elite prosper from this. Public execution of billionaires and corrupt politicians would see a wonderful cultural shift of focus away from this misanthropic social disease.
What do I mean by ‘Random’, and how is random in fact ‘Systemic’ and therefore ‘Just’?
To be clear, I’m not saying that this billionaire execution policy would be publicly understood as random, just that we as thinking people need to understand how random shit actually is in life. People are essentially irrational, emotionally driven beings. The romantic, dark, inspired, judgmental, curious, vengeful, generous, lustful, bright, and forgiving inner urges indeed dwell deep within our subconscious. This is better explained by Carl Jung, so I won’t try to.
But whether this is an evolutionarily derived function, or whether we are feeding the archons and aeons, or both, is at this point, neither here nor there.
The Gods of Justice are real, whether they really exist or whether they are reified. And today, the people demand blood, and there must be blood, and the blood must flow.
What we need to focus on is the function of public executions of billionaires and politicians, and why their random executions are the only way to help society, and why the Chinese system is ultimately also random and yet just, despite the appearances of the human construct of ‘methodological’ and ‘systematic’.
So why are we saying ‘random’? It’s often random a person decides to commit a crime, it’s random the conditions that a person finds themselves in that leads to their becoming a criminal, random is also the genetic material they inherited, or the hormonal condition they’ve arrived at, which compels them to solve real or imagined problems through crime, (and besides that no one chooses either their parents nor their early formative experiences), and it’s also often random that they are in fact caught, random if they had a good attorney, and random if the judge was lenient, random if the jury was convinced or capable or interested in being convinced, and random therefore at the end, also, is the punishment. Yet oddly it serves a very specific, logical, and necessary generalized purpose for society. At this point the random transforms into its opposite – the systematic. Therefore we have a Justice System, and not a Justice Lottery.
But in actuality, it’s a lottery. In fact in sentencing, lenient judges overtly take into account the lottery nature of life and circumstances that lead to the commission of a crime, ‘he was dealt a bad hand in life‘. But those tougher on crime may recognize all those things, but still promote the harshest punishment because, well ‘tough shit‘. And so to billionaires too, we have to get into habit upon execution day, of saying ‘tough shit’.
Of course we must go through the charade of pinning the actual punishment on the criminal who committed the offense. And sure, that matters too, and naturally there must be a trial. But all trials, by and large, are show-trials. They serve a social function far more than a narrow justice function in the abstract sense of justice. It’s less about the immediate singular victim, and more about making examples, and establishing where the pale is, as a warning to others. Then, we feel collective catharsis that the criminal was prosecuted, and whether they can be rehabilitated is far less interesting or meaningful to the masses than if they are simply punitively harmed, in the sense of vengeance.
What matters then is which class of citizens we target for Justice – The People or the Elites? China says the elites, and they have it right.
But which billionaires should we execute first?
What we need now is a justice lottery system that randomizes the socially-approved violence on a socially beneficial target, billionaires and the politicians who work for them. All billionaires are crooks. They are crooks in some way or another. Maybe they won the lottery of being born to billionaire parents – the most innocent kind of billionaire but also the most unjust of all. They aren’t even capable of being aware of the criminality which gave rise to the conditions of their own birth! And since we’ve dispensed with the notion of a divinely ordained hereditary line of succession of inherited privilege, it’s only systematized because we formally approve of it, but lo! The Gods no longer want it. And yet everyone hates the billionaires. But is this from a sense of justice, or a sense of ‘resentiment’? Is there a clear difference? It doesn’t matter, let’s execute them randomly, anyway.
And equally random would be to find that they committed some crime against the people. Because hedge funds, investment consortia, stock manipulation, real-estate development, the pharmaceutical industry, the weapons industry, are all on some deep and fundamental level, criminal enterprises. The biggest kinds of billionaire crooks, however, are the new money types, the nouveau riche – the Bezos’ and the Gates’ of this world. They stole it, far less innocent than being born into it. These types of billionaires will therefore probably be executed first – and this is fascinating because it would create a sort of anti-bourgeois communion between the people and old-money against new-money. But is that necessarily true?
Because ‘old money’ at this point now is also the Rothschild’s. And at the top of the execution list is probably, in this hypothetical and – we promise – ‘entertainment-only proposition’, to be legally safe and sound here, are the Rothschild clan. At any rate, at the start of any dynasty of inherited wealth, was someone at the beginning who stole it. Therefore, the random isn’t so random in the broad sense, but in the specific sense, those who will be executed first will probably be selected – philosophically speaking – at random. Again, no doubt, a system will be in place, in which there is a suspected crime of some sort, and some winding investigation that leads to formal charges against this or that billionaire or self-enriching politician.
So perhaps we make two lists, the born billionaires, and the overt thieves. We’ll have to sort if that’s two lotteries or one, but to be clear, they are all criminals. The best way that they can avoid being on the list, is to use their position of power and privilege to help advocate for the billionaire-execution lottery program that American society so desperately needs.
Just think about what a wonderful example it would set for others, and how it would instill in the youth the notion that indeed their society is a society where virtue exists, where right wins over wrong, where the evil are punished and the good prevail.
Every society has a legitimating ideology, and if that falls, the society falls
It would seem that every society has some sort of legitimating ideology, and for there to be some cohesion between what a society says it’s all about, and what it appears to be really all about, it also seems that there’s a need for ritualized symbolic action which underscores that. What do I mean?
Take for instance the legitimating ideology in the United States, that it’s a constitutional republic with democratic traditions – or since about World War I, the ideology shifted ‘leftwards’ in the Wilson era – that it’s a ‘Democracy’ – so much of a democracy that you should be willing to die for it, even in other lands that aren’t attacking you directly, but perhaps represent some existential threat to the ideology in the abstract.
So for there to be some semblance of cohesion between the legitimating ideology of a constitutional republic, or democracy if you will, and what it appears to be really all about, you have to have a supreme court that rules on things ostensibly based upon the constitution. And you have to have this ritual of voting for these congressional representatives and also the executive branch. And taken together, we’ve sewn together the notion of a constitutional republic with democratic traditions – or a democracy – and some sort of evidence of ‘shit happening in real life’ that corresponds to that ideal.
But where does that leave us in reality, when the supreme court consistently interprets the constitution in such a way, so far removed from the freedom-based conception of limited government and individual liberties, and towards tyranny? And where does that leave us when we have elected representatives who rarely if ever fulfill the mandate they are delegated to fulfill, and at the same time a very obvious plutocratic, oligarchic class of real rulers who do as they please regardless of the outcome of these ritualized elections?
It leaves people feeling like they need some very real catharsis. And people in the U.S feel very much abused and dis-empowered, disenfranchised by the government and the corporations for which it stands.
All societies are based on Lynching Culture – the in-group against the out-group – that’s what defines, by contrast, the definition of society itself
There is no definition without contrast, and the definition of society is contrasted to what is anti-society, that is, anti-social. Beyond the pale. And that’s why societies lynch. But the goodness or badness of a society can be boiled down to which class of people are subject to lynching. In the Jim Crow south, it was ‘uppity negroes’. The US is still focusing its lynch culture on those of the underclass who get too uppity, and that’s a problem. Among other things, it implies that uppity behavior is only permissible from those who actually rule you.
That’s why it appears that we have a sensational culture of cheering for vicarious justice against random low-level crooks. The U.S has a ‘lynching’ culture where retributive, punitive justice prevails over the idea of corrective justice. And that lynching culture serves as a pressure-release valve on an otherwise – well not so much otherwise – very tense and overburdened culture.
The real problem here is that it gets the people to be at war with themselves, and this can only serve the interests of the powers that be. Now, any legitimating ideology must also serve the interests of the powers that be, by definition, because that’s who requires legitimization. But the more actually legitimate these actions of government are, the more legitimizing these activities will be in the mid to long term. The cathartic, pressure-release valve of American lynching culture is a very very short term high, leave us all wanting more.
Because no matter how many child molesters and petty thieves we see get killed in prison or shot by store owners (respectively), and no matter how much we all love to see this go down, we aren’t fulfilled.
That’s because we’ve sacrificed the wrong animal to the Gods of Justice.
So we love to watch viral clips of shop keepers pulling off a reversal on would-be thieves and robbers, before the internet it was shows like COPS. Even in federal penitentiaries, where inmates love to watch TV, the inmates are rooting for the cops in the same way that the older generation has a strong and deep-seated urge for conditions to be as difficult and formative for their children as they were for themselves.
And perhaps that’s the essence of some impulse towards conservatism in society, between generations. That’s an interesting contradiction, we work to build better lives for ourselves and a better society, but we don’t really want the next generation to have it so easy, because we intuitively understand that through hardship and struggle we develop something called ‘character’ and the ‘virtues’. ”I walked to school every day, up-hill, both ways’‘. But let’s not digress.
What I’m proposing instead, wouldn’t be inherently destabilizing to the ruling class either, it’s not some revolutionary idea in the Marxian sense that it would upturn social relations, it wouldn’t put the first into last, etc. What it would do is in fact aid in creating a communion between the powers that be and the people.
Now, I’m not opposed to some Gramscian meta-political hegemonic socio-cultural fight to set the stage for a later and genuinely revolutionary change. But the way the powers that be weaponized both German-American Critical Theory and French Postmodernism, wasn’t used this way – instead it was used to set the people at war with themselves, divide and conquer, the culture war.
We have to face the fact that there will be for the foreseeable future, at least within the context of modern or post-modern techno-industrial civilization, some ‘powers that be’, or other. What matters then is the level of communion that exists between the people and the powers that be. What ties them together are common values and a common culture, because what isn’t tying them together in the raw sense are their base economic interests in terms of their opposed relations to the means of production and distribution; that is, wealth creation and how we divvy it up.
It isn’t against the law, nor against the unspoken corporate law of ‘say it and lose your job’, to speak freely about the desirability of executing mass murderers for example. So the idea of capital punishment isn’t beyond the pale. The problem is that we’re getting our catharsis from the wrong source.
The brilliant execution of elites will lead to (r)evolutionary change that would benefit us all
What’s great about revolutions is, the ideology of said revolution set aside (democratic, fascist, communist, anarchist, etc.), is that it results in a rotation of elites. But through a culture of ritualized execution of billionaires and politicians – instead of the constant minor league, small-fries retributive and punitive justice against the common man – we would also arrive de facto at some rotation of elites. Fresh blood, and with fresh blood comes fresh ambitions, and fresh ambitions legitimize themselves with so-called fresh ideas.
What the people want is to have the swamp drained. Fresh ideas. New blood. But you have to drain the old blood to get fresh blood. And so the people want blood. And the people should have blood, and we need to commence right away with the public execution of corrupt politicians and billionaires. We must give the people what they want. Not an approximation of it, and not a proxy. It must be bullets to the backs of heads or guillotines, to the billionaires themselves. And we’re going to have to use a sha zhu bang to make sure we have the right people killed.
What I’m saying is not only very rational in the sense that it takes into account human irrationality, but also directly in line with what everyone really thinks and feels, yet aren’t allowed to say publicly. And it would be a wonderful thing for the culture if we could overcome the tyranny of politically correct culture, and restore freedom of thought, of speech, of advocacy and association. And this can begin by ending the war of the people vs. the people, and introduce some good old fashioned execution of public officials and corporate bosses.
And to be public within the context of modernity, media, and techno-industrial civilization and the media complex, means it has to be a highly celebrated event on television.
We can show a ‘this is your life’ sort of collage, film reel in the pre-execution show, where the public can see the lavish life they’ve lived, a full perusal of their instagram and social media accounts, yachts, homes, cocaine, their politician friends, and so on. Then a public reading of the charges, the thousands who perished or lost their lives and homes, public testimony from the victims and families.
Bullets, guillotines, I don’t know. The billionaires themselves shouldn’t be subjected to either cruel or unusual punishment, and since we understand this ritual to be about the positive effect on society and not per se some punitive act against the accused in real terms, then it should be as fast and painless as possible. I guarantee the public would cheer it on just the same.
It serves the same purpose, you see, that we already have, when a very gluttonous and morally questionable celebrity overdoses and dies, or loses a lawsuit and all their wealth, or in the music industry when they kill each other in a shoot-out. The public rejoices, the people love to see these elites fall. The problem is that in our contrived modern system, the celebrities are ‘false’ elites, they are literally actors, acting as elites. The real elites aren’t dying enough, and not dying fast enough, they aren’t losing their money and reputations. They use Hollywood celebrities as phony proxies for what people really want.
Politicians are very similar to Hollywood (and Instagram, YouTube, etc.) celebrities, yet they are specifically charged with carrying a duty to the public which in reality only the billionaires today have the power to control.
For this reason, we should include politicians on the sha zhu bang.
And again, people intuitively get this, and they know this in their hearts, which is why celebrity deaths are the wrong sacrifice, the Gods of Justice, who live through the people, are not satiated this way, and inevitably the people quickly demand more blood.
It’s time to end the Collective Misanthropy of executing the riff-raff, and perform the Singularly Humanist task of executing billionaires
On a certain level, the people understand themselves that those being executed in the US are also ‘the people’. And this becomes a very bad sort of expression of ‘self hate’, and leads to all forms of misanthropy and stupid thinking and self-inflicted voting harm among the people. The execution of billionaires and corrupt politicians would not only better legitimize the governmental system of the executioners, but also create a healthier culture of the citizens in and among themselves. Those billionaires not executed, would in the public eye, be avoiding execution because they are performing their social contract. Social contracts are largely a myth, but they are a significant ‘noble lie’ that holds society together.
There must be blood, and more blood, and lots of blood. But which animal gets sacrificed is extremely important in order to satisfy the Gods of Justice. The Gods of Justice act through the people, one thing that connects all societies – whether monarchies, theocracies, or republics of the socialist or capitalist variety, the one thing that connects these all is that we know the Gods of Justice are displeased if the society – as expressed through the collective neuroses of the people – is dysfunctional.
China has arrived at a much more functional society than the US, even while it also appears to have an implacable establishment elite, haves and have-nots, and innumerable regional and class differences and contradictions within the vastness of Chinese society.
But rather than a myopic culture of giving the people the blood they want through racial divisions, us vs. them politics within the people, liberals vs. conservatives, ‘I’m not a Nazi’ Alt-Righters vs. Clintonist-Sorosists, the Chinese are sacrificing the right animal.
And so the Gods of Justice are satiated, and are pleased by this divine sacrifice. They still imprison and execute all sorts of other people too. But that isn’t where the society itself is finding its rod of legitimizing divination.
People aren’t inherently good or bad, but if we define good as ‘social’ and bad as ‘anti-social’, then people are inherently good, at least what they are striving for is to be social. This is why peer approval, a sense of belonging, and feeling good when we’ve contributed something, are so very real to us.
Trump Understands This
Clinton wants us at war with each other. It’s the social justice warriors against the deplorables. The deplorables of course, within the context of the illusion of a two-party system, also get mired in us vs. them thinking that divides the people.
But Trump tapped into something greater, something ‘truer’. And this truth was that it’s the swamp that needs draining. It’s Clinton that needs to be in jail.
Now to the extent that Trump may be a demagogue in the negative, cynical sense of the word as understood by Thucydides and the Athenian philosophical tradition, and simply uses this rhetoric of a promise of some Chinese-type of anti-elitist populist justice against the powers-that-be to legitimize a nevertheless unjust system, is another question.
But the essence of what we are looking at as two examples, which explain the fact that Trump supporters love Trump, and Hillary’s de facto supporters are merely ‘suck-it-up-and-vote-Dem’ reluctant, and are driven more by their hatred of what they imagine Trump supporters represent. Of course Trump and his people also play upon traditional divide-the-people tropes that dog-whistle racial and geographic divisions in the society. And this is both unfortunate in that its used and yet that it’s necessary in the American two-party system. It’s an effective tool and weapon, and both sides use it.
What Bernie and Trump had in common, and why Hillary failed and why her politics and supporters will always fail, is that the people’s lust for blood is intuitively, morally, historically, and in fact properly satiated, when the blood is drawn from the elites. But where Bernie was weak is that he didn’t explicitly enough call for blood. He doesn’t look like someone that could really pull the trigger. Now, is Trump the sort of corrupt billionaire that ‘should’ be executed? Only along that trajectory, do the Clintonist-Sorosists use the trope of sacrificing the correct animal upon the altar. But the people know the problem isn’t just Trump, it’s all the Trumps, so if the one true Trump calls for the whole system of Trumps to come down, then the one true Trump is exempt from the category of corrupt billionaires. But … only if he does it. And so far, he hasn’t.
The other problem is that calling for the execution of politicians, isn’t new or revolutionary. Even in recent memory, effigies of both Bush and Obama were publicly burned. That we see the Clintonist-Sorosists and their fake left allies engaging in this, is pure theatrics with no promise of the real blood that the people want, and want right now.
Trump is among the only billionaire who openly called for ‘draining the swamp’, for retributive and punitive justice against the other corrupt elites. Now we have Elon Musk on the scene, and he appears to be gravitating towards this direction too.
This gives us some interesting ideas and some reason for hope, that among the elites we may find as well some resonance for the idea of the public execution of elites.
To build a society with a humanist expectation and against the prevailing illness of misanthropy, to set the stage today for a future culture based on something better tomorrow, the Gods of Justice must be satiated, and the ritual blood sacrifice of billionaires – the highest prize of all, the ultimate sacrificial lamb – must be had. And that’s what we need today.
If this doesn’t happen, society will devolve into a bellum omnium contra omnes, which we are already seeing. If that’s what happens, and that’s indeed more likely than my modest proposal, then so be it. At least there’s preppers.