The importance of "political-consciousness"

It's essential that "all beings" participate in the process of "doing politics" (people, animals, plants etc.). If they aren't able to do so themselves they must be represented and considered empathetically. Otherwise it becomes almost certain that their needs won't be met and the whole world gets out of balance.

It's a notorious truth that we're already facing this imbalance today and that it's pace has progressively quickened over the last couple of years.
The exploitation of people, fellow beings and the ecosystem as a whole is undeniable. The only question of depute is the extend and the changeability of this multilayered imbalance.

There are many levels where one can and could confront this disparities today. The needs of depriviliged people, abused animals and exploted landscapes are hard to overlook. Accordingly, the fields of political actions are vast and numerous.

Unfortunately just a few people actually care about politics and ethics today. It seems as if the majority of people only sees their own suffering and not the bigger picture in which it is involved in.

Therefore, the responsibility and power everyone should have is centered only on a few. This forms a “hegemonic power structure” (structure of dominance) which has its own dynamic and “naturalizes” itself trough ongoing repetition. People start to think that they have no impact on politics and withdraw from it even further.

The only solution to this bias I can think of is to gradually rediscover the power and with that the responsibility everyone ought to have. We the society have become the corporate/governmental “nestling” which is afraid of its own emancipation. Regarding to this image there are basically two choices: 1. Aim for a revolution 2. Induce reformations.

In my opinion a revolution can't do any good when there isn’t a common awareness for what to aim for (a public rooted set of ethics). The problem isn’t black and white. It reaches deeper than the notion of “victim vs. villains” suggests. The hegemonic patterns that waft through societies are interwoven with all “actors” (the government, the companies, the society etc.).

So who would we revolt against? The companies we work for and consume from? The government we’ve elected? Or even against ourselves and our own ignorance?

We’re not living in a totalitarian society where every deviant opinion is fought by military force. Our constrains go deeper and can’t be overcome by simply overpowering institutions. We at least would need a shared vision to replace their political functions after the revolution.

Accordingly we might be better off seeking for reforms instead of a big revolution.

One aspect of gaining political capability is by consciously forming "individually" our own opinion about issues of political interest by critically reading/talking and watching about them. This multiple step approach requires time, reflexivity and persistence, but it can lead to a certain ethical/political education which enables you to identify the “political intervention points” – the basis for every sustainable reformation.

But this won’t work if this knowledge only stays within the minds of individuals. Civil reformations need the power of the public in form of social movements or at least many people that share some "core values".

The problem (beside of the feeling of powerlessness) is that society appears to have hardly any time for dealing with political issues. There seems little awareness that their personal problems could be related to their lack of political interest.

This “delusion” can be an important starting point for political action. The question is: How to “enlighten” respectively educate people about their “delusions” without being violent and authoritarian.

For a start I reckon its fundamental that one doesn’t see oneself outside this “deluded body of society”. You’ll always face yourself while approaching others because you are in some sense one with them. I think you can’t educate anyone without educating yourself at the same time. It's almost certain that you yourself as a "enlightener" have your own misconceptions. All in all it certainly requires a degree of openness in combination with doubt towards oneself and others.

In consequence we might need indirect approaches like “Culture Jamming” which e.g. mimics and alters the message of institutions in such a way that their inherit contradictions become obvious. Alteration has been shown as a very useful tool for making people think and face their delusion without harming their dignity.

I’m convinced that doing politics can never be an easy task, because it’s always a process which involves billions of other peoples and uncountable other "factors" which have to be emphatically considered as well, even tough they can't represent themselves as f.i. animals, plants and  the rest of nature.

All of these "factors" have their interrelations and coherences with each other. As a result it becomes almost impossible to be politically just to every element of the world. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean it's indifferent how we act. There is a certain degree of injustice which keeps the world dynamic I would say, but if you raise this degree too high, than everything gets out of balance. It's like the difference between having a bonfire in the garden and setting your house on fire. One is spending us warmth and comfort and the other is making us homeless.

In general terms, everything we daily do and don’t do is to some extend a political act. Every product we consume and every conversation we have or haven’t has an impact on people and the environment in general. We’re not only voting once in a while – we’re voting all the time.

If one is aware of that impact he/she has, it automatically leads to a general question of ethics. What are my values? Which world do I wanna live in and how can I get it there?

The more people come aware of their influence the harder doing politics will become. A politician has to genuinely convince the people with arguments and can’t just push a bill trough hoping no one will notice because of its apparent “complexity”.

But why should it be easy to govern the interest of billions of people and millions of species? Its ought to be critical. Like I said, I believe that the world will never be completely fair but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth pursuing for, don’t you think?

Accordingly, the goal must be to involve as many people in the political process as possible to make the world as socially/ecologically/ethically fair as possible.

The government in my eyes has a similar function like a parent has to their kids. It should protect them till they’re able to live on their own. Therefore I envision institutions (government/corporations) which progressively lower the structure that they provide until they don’t need the restraining tool of hegemony anymore.

This anarchic idea shouldn’t be confused with current neo-liberal politics. I don’t think that just lowering the restrictions will solve all our problems. I’m rather convinced that that it is dangerous to draw off the structure before the society is in the process of literally emancipation. Only at the point when the society is able to handle more responsibilities, it should become more liberal and with that more free. But this is still far off the agenda of today. Especially because the ethically taken responsibility by the majority of the population is still to weak.

We have a long and educational road ahead of us which will include self doubts, setbacks and misjudgments but it’s the only way I can envision, if we want to strive towards a more equal and fairer world.