|
Managerial state is a paleoconservative concept used in critiquing modern social democracy in Western countries. The term takes a pejorative context as a manifestation of Western decline. Theorists Samuel T. Francis and Paul Gottfried say this is an ongoing regime that remains in power, regardless of what political party holds a majority. Variations include ''therapeutic managerial state'',〔Jim Kalb, (Conservatism Frequently Asked Questions ), 01 March 2009.〕 ''welfare-warfare state''〔Matt Barganier, (The Welfare-Warfare State, Old West Edition ), ''AntiWar.Blog'', June 28, 2005.〕 or ''polite totalitarianism.''〔Nicholas Strakon, (Who we are; what we're up to: Introducing ''The Last Ditch'' ), ''Dispatches from "The Last Ditch,"'' at ''Thornwalker.com'', September 1994.〕 Francis, following James Burnham, said that under this historical process, “law is replaced by administrative decree, federalism is replaced by executive autocracy, and a limited government replaced by an unlimited state.”〔(''Sam Francis.net'' ).〕 It acts in the name of abstract goals, such as equality or positive rights, and uses its claim of moral superiority, power of taxation and wealth redistribution to keep itself in power. == The Managerial Worldview == Paul Gottfried, in ''After Liberalism'', defines this worldview as a "series of social programs informed by a vague egalitarian spirit, and it maintains its power by pointing its finger accusingly at antiliberals." He calls it a new theocratic religion. In this view, when the managerial regime cannot get democratic support for its policies, it resorts to sanctimony and social engineering, via programs, court decisions and regulations. This includes mass welfarism, positive rights, laws punishing racism, sexism and homophobia, and centralized control of public education. (While paleocons often criticize neoconservatism, they still see these opponents as just one of many power blocs that support this managerialism.) He elaborated that A regime engaged in behavior modification... () begin by appealing to unproved premises, which the reader is nudged into accepting, move on to therapeutic criteria for right reasoning, and finally, as seen in recent hate speech and anti-Holocaust revisionist laws, end by reverting to the Argumentum ad baculum, which may mean arresting those considered criminally insensitive. At stake here is not the idle pastime of scribes. It is an attempt undertaken by prominent intellectuals to elevate pluralism into behavioral coercion.〔''After Liberalism,'' p. 85.〕 Francis argued that this system oversees "the managed destruction of such relationships of civil society as property, patterns of association, education, and employment."〔(''Chronicles Magazine'' ).〕 He elaborated: The managerial ruling class, lodged primarily in the state and the other massive bureaucratic structures that dominate the economy and mass culture, must undermine such institutions of traditional social life if its power and interests are to prevail. Disparities between races--rebaptized as "prejudice," "discrimination," "white supremacy," and "hate" to which state and local governments and private institutions are indifferent or in which they are allegedly complicit-provide constant targets of convenience for managerial attack on local, private, and social relationships. Seen in this perspective, as a means of subverting traditional society and enhancing the dominance of a new elite and its own social forms, the crusade for racial "liberation" is not distinctly different from other phases of the same conflict that involve attacks on the family, community, class, and religion.〔(''Chronicles Magazine'' )〕 In a more general way, Joseph Sobran argues that technology and false notions of progress give people a false sense of autonomy: C.S. Lewis remarked that every increase in man's power over nature can turn out to mean an increase in the power of some men over others, with nature as its instrument. Given technological progress, we need to fight hard to retain our clarity about the nature and rights of human beings, or we face what Lewis called "the abolition of man." Abortion and totalitarianism both represent new possibilities of some men's power over others, and both are defended by certain ideologies of "progress." We hear of human "autonomy" and of man's "control of his own destiny." But the autonomy is enjoyed by a select (or self-selected) few, and the control is exercised by a shrinking elite; those who are powerless, whether unborn children or the subjects of a totalist dictatorship, simply don't count.〔Joseph Sobran, ("Foreword" ) to ''Single Issues'' (Human Life Press, 1983), posted at ''Sobran's: The Real News of the Month'' website.〕 Thomas Fleming argues that the managerial problem extends to issues of war, peace and international order: I prefer the old Adam of strife and carnage to the new Prometheus of peace and human rights. Better a world torn apart by Husseins and Qaddafis, better a war to the knife between the PLO and the Likud Party, between Zulus and Afrikaaners, than a world run by George Balls and Dag Hammarskjölds, because a world made safe for democracy is a world in which no one dares to raise his voice for fear that mommy will put you away some place where you can be reeducated."〔Thomas Fleming, "Further Reflections on Violence," ''Chronicles'', November 1990, p. 15.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「managerial state」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|