My post on Indirect Rule & the elites.

[applegrove]

Disraeli really said it when he called Conservative rule: organized hypocrisy.

Britain called it Indirect rule and it came about as a colonial administrator named Lugard apparently sat and watched a Uganda King show off. The king made a slave bring the slaves child to him.. and then kill the child. No questions were asked.

The British managed to manage 1/3 of the World at very little cost to themselves. Indirect rule was the key. By playing tribes off against each other they cold rule through the tribal leaders. By creating hierarchies where there were none (if that was the case) and then keeping the people busy by playing them off against each other. That way the little groups that only identified themselves with a small group of exactly like thems... they could never cross boundaries and become a plurality.

Even Patriotism is tribal. It says..identify in an adolescent way and do not use your empathy on anyone else.

Adolescents are tribal and will identify with a like group and do things they would never think of alone..for the sake of cohesion and due to pressure unbearable to a raw and not fully developed soul. That is why Hitler spend years 'growing down' his followers. Once fully adolescent.. these former adults did not have to feel responsible for the actions they took that hurt others (like baiting or scapegoating).

Alway above the disparate tribes in the colony - would be the ruling elites (of just administrators for Britain in tiny communities). Anything petty (which could include matters of great importance like schooling) was for the tribal elders to decide. Anything to do with resource wealth or threats to the empire were decided on at the top. Lugard called it Dual Mandate. Two governments: two existences and neither the twain shall meet. The anger was so palatable on the face of George Bush as his sleep was disturbed so he could be flown into Washington to sign a law on Terry Schiavo and kiss the asses of the tribe that elected him and doesn't know about the dual mandate yet.

Scary that the Repukes are using indirect rule on the USA electorate in order that the elites (repukes) can rule - all the while democracy breaks out all over the place. The reason for that is that democracies are slow (you have to listen to all comers). But Decision-making amongst the American elites can be fast (and dirty) if they do not have to talk to the electorate (and the repukes can implement policies that benefit their elites while keeping the masses busy on local issues - state abortion battles, Christian moral battles, etc.) The whole point is the keep the electorate & the plurality out of the important business of empire building in the USA while everyone else is busy in their little democratic countries.

The reason why they want the tribe to be a nation state outside the USA is so that the tribes will not cross national boundaries and cause trouble and build great power (like Islamist fundies who want all the Arab Middle East to be one big country - and retard the right of women along the way). So big slow tribes called democracies outside the US who will identify with each other by nationality rather than class or race or religion. And inside the USA.. a whole bunch of little tribes who will - so the little people do not constantly interfere with hegemony (for instance prefer social programs to huge military build up).

So the neocon dream is to create tribes to keep people busy and identifying with the exact group that is good for elite geopolitics.

The British used and promoted tribes in Nigeria (Biafran Civil War at Independence) in India/Pakistan (nuclear build up still going on 40 years after Independence and separation & genocide) and Quebec (the catholic church kept people mighty busy having babies until the 1960s when people finally looked up and realized that all the wealth in their province belonged to people who spoke not a hint of French).

IMHO.

Google Indirect Rule and see how it turned out. And yes - the British created it where there was none. The Ibo in Nigeria were very, very egalitarian and shared everything.. The British needed kings so they took the benevolent tribe elders and turned them into rich hierarchy where that had never been Ibo practice before. Just as the Repukes chop up the USA into disparate churches..red states and blue ones, pro-gay marriage, and encourage and do nothing to discourage racism in the south (where are the outcries against White Supremacists who have killed nearly as many by terrorism as bin Laden don't you think George Bush should put on his cowboy hat and kick around the White Supremacists around for a bit if he is such the big dog?

And the State's rights movement is part of this as is dismantle-ling all national delivery of care or empathy.

Divisions will never be solved. Look at how the Bush people try and hide the abortion issue behind brain candy like Terry S (the anti-abortionists were beginning to wonder). State's rights just means a fight will never end when it comes to legislating ideals. The fight will go on and 'Mercans will be kept busy fighting each other..rather than being a plurality and voting together and kicking the Repukes out. They need to teach the example of selfishness because otherwise..people will care when they see real poverty hit and the middle class go kerplunck. But not if they are true patriots!