75. What is after democracy?

The audio recording is available at https://youtu.be/f8zTAH4LQVw.

Considering the duality and pairing of our world, equality's counterpart is hierarchy. Therefore, whoever dismantles equality, quantity, is building up hierarchy, quality, and whoever dismantles hierarchy, verticality, is making things linear and equal. This principle applies both at the individual level and the societal level. What we experience in the European, but not only European, in worldwide demonocracy (distorted democracy) of the 21st century is the result of a long process of degradation leading to equality, which has been ongoing for several centuries, perhaps since the 15th century. Taking into account the social law of duality, what follows the linear democracy based on equality and mathematical quantity cannot be anything other than a vertically organized, hierarchically structured society based on networked quality connections. 

If we can step out of linearity, we will enter verticality. The method and tool for this exit is the recognition of the intersection of linear and vertical, lower and upper networks, and universality. The process of deconstruction and reconstruction is possible both at the individual level and the societal level, if there is courage, will, perseverance, and a willingness to take risks. At the individual level, the process begins within each person and continues with their implementation. At the societal level, the process of reconstruction, making order is expected to come from the collective action of individuals who have already built their own hierarchies, forming networks—which could be called a mass transition. To put it gently, it is desertion from today's democracy. 

It might seem utopian, but the construction of a hierarchical network-based organization will probably take as much time as the deconstruction did—perhaps five hundred or even a thousand years. However, if some explosive events, such as wars or pandemics, occur, the process could be faster or even slower. Why would it be worth building a hierarchical society again, and what should the new hierarchy after democracy look like? Should it resemble the old one, or considering the "positive outcomes" of the centuries-long decline, should it be a new and functional hierarchy? Or may be the man-machine society is comming?  It is worth rebuilding the hierarchy because the fabric of society, its functionality, and human relationships are determined by both horizontal and vertical networks of connections. The 20th and 21st centuries have proven that linear, equality-based societies, which deny universality and are thus individualized, break apart. What seems to hold society together is the continuous yearning for the accumulation of material and money, which results in domination, sinking into materialism, hunger for life, a thirst for success and career, or magic words like interest, profit, and progress. 

In the rebuilding or reconstruction of hierarchy, it is necessary to uncover the causes, foundations, workings, mistakes, and current state of societies based on equality, as well as the reasons and factors behind the disappearance of previously hierarchical societies. Furthermore, we must define the foundations, factors, and operational rules necessary for the construction of a new hierarchical, quality network-based society. Note: In the 19th century, Otto von Bismarck, Chancellor of the German Empire, entrusted prof. Gustav Ruhland from Freiburg university with the task of answering why empires dissolve. The answer was: empires break apart due to the interest mechanism, the concept of free money. He was also the one who started the Kulturkampf (culture war) against the Catholic Church. 

To complete this task, several questions need to be answered, for example:

1. What were the previous hierarchical societies that served as models like? The answer to this question is best provided by the enlightened minds of the ancient world, who were also scholars, philosophers, and statesmen, because in traditional societies, science and philosophy were not separate. They determined that the universe, the cosmos, or the structure of existence operates according to order, leading back to an initial state, an arche, which today we would call a relational state, or rather the qualitative state of relationships. This state later became known as the principium. They also knew that these states, relationships, could transform into one another. Today, we express this transformation in terms of the theory of relativity where energy can turn into matter and vice versa, also with the quantum theory having in focus the interrelations, connections between the particles. What connects them is the information. Information, or quality, gives the manifestation of relationships, that changing state where something (the indefinable) appears either as matter or energy. In the living world, an example of this relational information is genetic information, responsible for the inheritance of traits, such as DNA or RNA, where different relationships between components give rise to manifestations, like the colour of the eyes (blue or brown). In the ancient world, they knew that relationships and transformations are continuous, which they called apeiron, and that these represent a hierarchical order, as we can observe in the order of living organisms, for example, among lower and higher plants or animals.

2. What types of relationships exist? In terms of duality, relationships are horizontal, temporal, and material, as well as vertical, spatial, and spiritual. The main players in these relationships are the sacred creations and human beings themselves. Only humans are capable of uniting and expressing vertical and horizontal connections; only they can be in space and time, and only they understand what is said above and can act in accordance with it. Man is both the instruments and the operator of these relationships. Functioning, existence is transformation. Transformation does not mean progress because in universality, there is no linear progression, only cyclical change. The shared characteristic of the world, both in the macrocosm (outside of the man) and in the microcosm (within the man), is constant transformation, or the change, dynamics, and fluctuation of relationships.