Modern Vedic Kingship vs Amoral Democracy

The tribesmen shall elect thee for the Kingship, these five celestial regions shall elect thee. Rest on the height and top of kingly power: thence as a mighty man award us treasures.- Atharava Veda 3.4.2

"Amoral Democracy", what on earth do I mean by that?  Am I just another garden variety fascist who is trying to paint democracy as some inherent evil that needs to be replaced by my rule or the rule of some dark inner circle?  Or am I trying to surreptitiously poison the minds of today's young democrats into rejecting and hating this beloved institution?  I think everyone knows by now that I root my self and my beliefs in the Vedas, and the Vedas do almost always speak of Hindu Kings ruling over society, but do the Vedas preach anti-democracy or fascism?  Can Vedic Kingship and democracy be compatible?

I remember a few years ago when I was still newly studying Hinduism and reading the Vedas, I had a slight crisis of consciousness, I don't want to be part of religion that can only truly work and be powerful in one place and at one time, I don't want to be a Hindu if that means I can only live its fulfillment in the ancient past or the distant future after an earthly cleansing.  What is the point of a religion or belief if it is not giving you power and happiness right now?  If the non-Vedic people can offer me strength and joy in the moment but my own religion can't, than how great is my religion? With this in mind I started becoming nervous as I read the Vedas and Vedic literature because I noticed that the reigning form of government in the Vedas seemed to be monarchy.  Why would this give me moment to pause?

I live in America, and everyone knows that America was formed because we were trying to break free of the British monarchy, and everyone also knows that several revolutions in Europe like the French Revolution and the creation of the Magna Carta were born in an attempt of the common people to thwart the power of tyrannical kings.  Indeed, the United States was founded upon the principle that Kingship, o perhaps the better word would be monarchy, is inherently exploitative and that it must be checked at all costs.  Thus in the United Stated we have the Constitution which insures many freedoms and a secular government with checks and balances, and the US Constitution strictly forbids titles of nobility.

Now is there anything inherently wrong with the US Constitution, or the idea that monarchies are inherently corrupt?  No, not really, though I would say that the US Constitution does have a few weaknesses which are now being exploited and will soon rip the United States apart.  First the US Constitution provides "Freedom of Religion", and it does this regardless of the religion's founding principles and end goals.  If a religion has a core principle and history of opposing secularism and democracy for the favor of some "One True God" and they are willing to work from within to destroy secular democracy, well the United States has proven it is very weak at countering such internal enemies. America is all riddled with internal religious vs secular conflicts which are rapidly destroying the fabric of American society and creating a culture of mistrust and animosity. 

Liberal Democracy Is Weakened By Amorality 

This brings us to another problem found in the US Constitution, and that is the fact that it is basically an amoral document, what do I mean by this?  Christians like to take credit for American democracy, they say "America was founded in Christian principles", but nothing could be further from the truth. When we look at the bible we never see any promotion of democracy as a form of government, but we do see the promotion of a cruel, oppressive and parasitic theocracy ruled over by kings and priests. The Old Testament of the bible lays out the preferred form of government very clearly, the Israelites are to invade the lands of pagans, oust or enslave them, destroy all their temples and erect their own temple. These invaders are then to reign over an enforced monotheistic society with laws that demonize the human spirit's need for philosophical and sexual diversity of expression, and they are to even murder their own children if they disobey the rules produced by their jealous god. 

The only thing that is Christian about America is that it was founded upon theft, hatred and genocide. Christians are not responsible for American democracy, but they are responsible for fermenting hatred against the Native American pagans who lived here and purposely wiping them out to steal their lands where these Christians could implement a culture they had stolen from their pagan European ancestors. That's right, the Christians wanted their cake and eat it to, they wanted to follow bible example and wipe out pagans to steal their property, but they did not want to live under an oppressive theocratic tyranny as is also exampled in the bible.  Democracy did not come from the bible but form pagan Greece, and later they stole the idea of a republic from pagan Rome. If you study the history of the men who wrote the constitution, they made it very clear that the government of America was not to be founded upon Christianity, and many of them even disliked Christianity all together. 

“The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” ~1797 Treaty of Tripoli signed by Founding Father John Adams 

“Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by a difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.” ~Founding Father George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792

Now I started this thought on the fact that the US Constitution is an amoral document, and wanted to prove that it was not a Christian document, because the US Constitution was in many ways founded to check Christian religiosity.  The Founding fathers made it clear in the Constitution that the government would make no laws concerning religion, not because they were afraid of Muslims, but because they were afraid of Christians. Many colonists had come to the New World to escape Christian religious wars in Europe, also, at the time of the writing of the Constitution, the New World had already become divided by Christian diversity (Protestant vs Catholic) and so it would be best to leave any sort of religious morality out of the equation.

But the founding fathers did not think about what would happen when you actually need a morality to oppose a morality, meaning what do you do when a contradictory morality (one that is not in line with the Constitution) begins to flourish and gain power?  Liberal Democracy is not founded on any other morality than providing freedom of speech, freedom of religion and other freedoms to all, and it does not discriminate against who can have these freedoms and who cannot. Today in the United States we are having a problem, where people are practicing their freedom of religion and freedom of speech but are using these to promote ideologies which will take away the freedoms of others, and yes this is now reaching the point of mass violence. 

What is America and the rest of the Liberal Democracies doing to protect their citizens against aggressive and violent anti-democratic ideologies?  Not much, because it can't, Liberal democracy is not here to push one way of life over another, it is just here to make sure everyone is allowed to live as they wish, and if they are preaching hatred and violence, the only option Liberal democracy gives us is to prosecute the offenders after they have committed their crimes, meaning Liberal Democracy only gets involved after someone has been killed. Now I would also like to quickly point out that this amorality also applies to the economic sphere, where in the United States we are allowed to be captured and abused by every form of Capitalism and Socialism, since these ideologies can get a stranglehold because the US Constitution gives them the freedom to try, but also because the US Constitution has no economic morality of its own. Thus today we see in American an allowed thrashing of the people by both corporations and government bureaucracies which also pit us citizens against each others by asking us to take sides between these two abusive parents. 

American Checks And Balances Are A Good Idea

Now before I talk about why it is that I support Vedic Kingship, let me say what it is that I do like about American Liberal Democracy and that is the fact that at least this system tries to make checks and balances against any one person or faction from taking over the government and immiserating the people.  Through the constitution and other legal documents we have devised a system where there are three (actually four) branches of government which are created to check and balance each other.  We have the Congress which is made up of two houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Now the Congress is a federal regulatory body, but it is made up of state members, we are called the United States because we have a federal government that is buffered by State's Rights.

Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate are elected by the individual States and so the federal government is made up of several different interests, not a single federal interest.  Each state in the House of Representatives is given a number of votes depending upon the state population, this makes sure that the more populace states have proportional voting power and influence, meanwhile in the Senate there are only two Senators form each state so that larger states cannot dominate smaller states.  In order for any bill to be passed it must be approved by both of these houses which are designed to check each other. 

Then of course after a bill has been passed with have the President of the United States who can refuse to sign a bill and thus veto it, the president is also given other special powers above congress such as the power to issue certain executive orders and to make federal non-elected appointments, he or she is also the commander of the armed forces. However congress can impeach the president if they unanimously agree he or she is not the right man or woman for the job.  Finally we have the Supreme Court which has the power to overturn legislation passed by the Congress and signed by the President if the Supreme Court determines that these laws are "unconstitutional", meaning they impinge on other people's granted freedoms or raise the rights of one group above another.  However, the Supreme Court is also an amoral institution, they really should not have any opinion of their own, and any opinion they do carry comes from the individuals seated on the bench. 

Vedic Kingship Can Be Democratic

So now let's get to the point of this post which is a proposition for Vedic Kingship which can work in our modern world.  So why do we live in an amoral democracy today?  Because people were terrified of coming under the reign of Christian monarchies and experiencing the horrors of exploitation as they had in Europe. Wars between Christians and Protestants made enlightened Europeans deeply suspicious of religious governments and when they were able to form their own democracy they wanted to make sure that no one religion or even morality could reign over any other.  However these founders were not farsighted enough to see that an amoral government is impotent against aggressive undemocratic morals, and can do nothing but pick up the dead bodies after they have been run over by trucks driven by zealots on a religious crusade; the amoral democracy could never prevent this from happening in the first place because they cannot prevent the growth of these ideologies, that would be against Liberal Democratic nature. 

However we must all admit that even under the current growing conditions of social and economic insecurity we live in, most people would obviously prefer Liberal Democracy over monarchy or Kingship. But does Vedic Kingship need to be undemocratic or even a monarchy?  As I said in the beginning of my post, when I first started studying Hinduism I was a little disappointed by the fact that all of the forms of government in the Vedic literature seemed to be hereditary monarchies, and some of these were not all that great!  I would feel pretty weak if I could not offer up a Vedic solution to the governmental ills of the day, and it the Vedas can't help me right now, than I think we would have to admit that they are kinda lame.  I wanted to be able to propose Vedic governance that would work now, in the system we currently have, without resorting to revolution or mass murders... and I mean I wanted to be able to at least propose something on the ideological level, not even necessary immediate implementation.

The answer finally came to me when I got to reading the fourth Veda, the Atharva Veda, which deal with practical life.  Most people today are not going to be interested in a system with leaders who belligerently grab power or who claim authority because they are a certain person's son or daughter, we all know that assholes are born into every family.  However, I immediately became relieved when I read the 4th hymn of the 3rd Book of the Athrava Veda, which is titled "The Election of a King".  If you were to ask me, this hymn is not talking about the induction of some pre-planned king but the arrival of a new king, an unexpected yet needed king. The verses of the prayer make it clear that this king is elected by his tribesman and and is invited by his his kinsmen to rule, and he is asked to do this because the people believe he is the one who will bring them peace and prosperity. More than being elected and invited by the people to rule, this new king also seems to be chosen by the very essence of the universe, all of the material elements and conceptual consciousness of law and leadership seem to favor this man to rule, and so he is ushered in not only by election but by natural law. 

BOOK III

HYMN IV

A benediction at the election of a king 

1To thee hath come the kingship with its splendour: On! shine
   as lord, sole ruler of the people.
  King! let all regions of the heavens invite thee. Here let men
   wait on thee and bow before thee.
2The tribesmen shall elect thee for the Kingship, these five celestial
   regions shall elect thee.
  Rest on the height and top of kingly power: thence as a mighty
   man award us treasures.
3Kinsmen, inviting thee, shall go to meet thee, with thee go
  Agni as an active herald.
  Let women and their sons be friendly-minded. Thou mighty one,
   shalt see abundant tribute.
4First shall the Asvins, Varuna and Mitra, the Universal Gods,
   and Maruts call thee.
  Then turn thy mind to giving gifts of treasures, thence, mighty
   one, distribute wealth among us.
5Speed to us hither from the farthest distance. Propitious unto
   thee be Earth and Heaven.
  Even so hath Varuna this King asserted, he who himself hath
   called thee: come thou hither.
6Pass to the tribes of men. O Indra, Indra. Thou the Varunas
   hast been found accordant.
  To his own place this one hath called thee, saying, Let him adore
   the Gods and guide the clansmen.
7The Bounteous Paths in sundry forms and places,
   all in accord, have given thee room and comfort.
  Let all of these in concert call thee hither. Live thy tenth decade
   here, a strong kind ruler.

So now what does this tell us about creating a theory of modern Vedic Kingship?  Can a Vedic King be elected?  Yes, he can be elected by people because they believe he is the best to bring peace and prosperity, and this can be revealed by not only observing him but also by noticing that something in the natural essence favor this man (or woman) to be leader.  Now couple this with the fact that Hinduism does not provide commands but examples for how to best live in the natural essence of life, and that these examples change with time and circumstance, and we can quickly realize that we have always had the power to adapt Vedic Kingship to the here and now.  In Hinduism we do not have holy commands but we do write Smritis, these are Vedic based legal systems and social norms which attempt to apply universal and naturalistic Vedic truths to current situations and understanding. Smritits are not everlasting laws, and they can be corrupt or poorly designed, however they are a tool for us to keep the Vedas relevant in modern life.  So what kind of Smriti do we need in order to begin the idea of resurrecting modern Vedic Kings? 

Vedic Kingship Can Have Checks And Balances & Be Moral 

So the first part of resurrecting Vedic Kings has been taken care of, we can simply create a system where Vedic Kings are elected, and because we are not fully bound to any particular past structure, we can make Vedic Kingship palatable to the common person today by not making it a hereditary monarchy, though we don't have to be against that either. But who are we electing these Vedic Kings for, the world?  No, let's be honest, most non-Vedic people and even million upon millions of modern Hindus would not appreciate this idea in the least bit, and so such modern Vedic Kings would have to be elected by the people who are interested in resurrecting such a system, but remember for right now we are simply talking about making this idea viable, practice is the next step, so let's not get too wrapped up in the practical issues for right now.

But what will be guiding these Vedic Kings, what will keep them in check, in short, what is going to be operating behind them to make them even palatable to their own supporters?  No king can operate without a dense power structure behind his throne, but does this power structure seek to completely empower the king and make him a tyrant?  The Vedic System of society is just the opposite of tyranny, it is structures to make sure that the king nor any other faction of society is powerful enough to dominate and control.  It was Christianity and the early Christian kings who dismantled this system so as to harvest all the social power into the hands of a few people, and today's shadowy world rulers are the end product of this Christian goal.  

Now before I begin laying out the ideal system of Vedic checks and balances, I don't want anyone to think I am some romantic idealist, that I am painting a rosy picture of the Pagan and Hindu past, and stating that these were perfect. What I am saying is this, that the Hindu system of governance is fluid and adjustable, however if their is a general decline in the caliber of the human beings ruling the society, the Hindu system can lose its luster to the point that it no longer looks desirable, and then lower forms of thinking come in and pose as the saving alternative to an old and backward system.  What I am saying is that the ancient Hindu and Pagan forms of governance fell because they lost their intelligence and fluidity and needed to be wiped out, and now they can be rebuilt, modernized and safeguarded with the knowledge we have gained from these centuries of oppression, we can be humble enough to know that there are things we need to change if we want to regain our glory.

Now back to these Christian kings who ruined the idea of kingship and the checks and balances which go with them.  Now I have already explained how there is a tradition within Vedic Hinduism for democratic election of rulers, and that we are not bound by laws and so we can modernize our own election process. However, how did we get to this point that the vast majority of the world views amoral democracy superior to any other form of governance?  Now the ancient Hindus and pagans are to blame for not being adaptive enough to maintain their system, however the ancient system of checks and balances which are found in Hindu and pagan society were purposely eroded in Europe so the Christians could devour and destroyed the society (it was weake anyway though). So what is this system of checks and balances which makes Vedic Kingship stable and just?

Vedic Kingship (maybe call it leadership) is not fascist. Vedic Kingship is set within the Hindu Varna System which is designed for checks and balances, it is not designed to give one person or group commanding power over the social and economic sphere. Who are in charge (to a major degree) of the society's ideology and social structure? The Brahmans, men and women selected for intellectual temperament. The Brahmans naturally don't have the power to command their ideals on society, intellectuals by nature are rarely wealth accumulating or commanding. The Vedic Kingship (aka Leadership) comes from the Kshatriya class, men and women selected less for their theoretical knowledge and more for leadership skills. The Vedic Kingship is the one to lead society based on Vedic ideals, but in a healthy Hindu society no one will follow a king who does not have the blessings of the Brahmans. Does the Vedic Kingship (aka Leadership) have power over the economy and government bureaucracies? No, economic and governmental administration of the society is held by the Vaishya, men and women selected for their practical judgement. The Vaishya hold power over the society's administration no matter who the leader is and no King can operate his society without them. Does the Vedic King hold power over the means of production? No, the Sudras hold power over the means of production, men and women selected for their craft intelligence. The Sudras unite together into Guilds, communities which focus on the production of one or a few products, and they maintain a monopoly over their necessary product and skills. No one can function without the Sudra's cooperation and they cannot be easily replaced.  Now this is of course a simplified version of the ancient system of checks and balances, and it would need to be further flushed out and codified to make it work in the modern world, but here at least I hope you can see that Hinduism thought of restraining the power of the kings from the very beginning.

Due to a general social decline and lack of adaptability in both India and Europe, this functional system of checks and balances in Hindu and Pagan society became corrupt and subject to internal ridicule and disdain, and so when the religions and ideologies of the Kali Yuga appeared, they were easily able to lure people away and into a system which at least temporarily gave them more justice and comfort, temporarily. So in ancient Pagan Europe we have Brahmans, men and women of intellectual temperament who upheld the norms and ideologies of society and advised and supported the leaders, but when the Christians came in they closed all the school of the Brahmans and burnt their libraries and killed their most resistant members, and so the new Christian Kings got their new advise from the bible. The bible does not prescribe any checks and balances on the rulers, Israel is modeled on an enforced monotheistic tyranny and priesthood which are based almost solely in heredity, and this monarchy was set up to wipe out pagans and keep their own people in line with harsh and unnatural rules. The god of Israel is not one to be moderated or second guessed, and neither are his kings or priests. There is no really developed economic system given in the bible, except the enslavement of pagans under proto-Communism (that is for another post) or the invasion of pagan nations (theft) or through usury... the bible offers no organic self-sustaining economic system, only parasitism.  This coupled with the fact that the Christian Kings wanted to destroy the last checks on their power, this is why the Christians invented Capitalism, they destroyed the European Guilds by giving the means of their production into private hands with patents and trademarks, thus the community system of economy was destroyed and became more manageable and easier to manipulate as the economy fell into the hands of avarice individuals. Please See: The Hindu Guilds System Can Compete With Capitalism, Communism & Fascism

The point I am making here is that Hinduism does offer us an alluring system of checks and balances which can be democratic, and because we are endowed with freedom and creativity we are allowed to fashion a modern system which can begin to incorporate the ancient systems and socially compete with the ideologies of the non-Vedic people.  In its skeletal form we could say that we want to advance a system where Brahmans (ideologues), Kshatriyas (leaders), Vaishya (administrators) and Sudras (producers) are each given control over their respective areas of society and are likely to be locked into these roles because they are chosen by their temperament, and that each of these is a check on the others: The Brahmans control the ideas but don't command, the Kshatriyas need the support of the Brahmans to command, the Kshatriya need to the support of the Vaishya in administrating the government and the economy and the Vaishya need the support of the Sudras who maintain control over the means of production via their Guild System.  And yes, in our current system this could be accomplished through rules of democratic elections, just so long as a written system was put in place which helped us indentify which personality traits are necessary for each position (this must be elaborated on in another post). 

I want to end this with the fact that just because I am advocating Vedic Kingship, this does not mean I am anti-American, I think the American Constitution would be a very good base model of any proposed democratic Vedic System.  However, today we are living under democratic tyranny because we are being forced to accept ideas and practices which are inherently antagonistic against us, and we cannot act to defend ourselves until it it too late, we have an amoral system which cannot judge the ideas being projected, it can only prosecute individuals after they have caused harm based on the hateful ideals they have been taught and which are quickly proliferating in society.  Hinduism offers a morality that is pluralistic and diverse, but it is based in pantheistic non-duality and an attempt to align society with our understanding of natural law and social science.  By making the Vedas the center of our moral system we give infinite paths of worship and belief, including atheism, but we also protect ourselves from self-righteous monotheists and destructive Capitalists and Socialists who seek to destroy our diversity and replace it with a relative monoculture.  Vedic Hinduism does not claim to be perfect, but that is why it is perfect, because it can adapt while still maintaining a core value, an evolving tradition based up social experimentation and results.  America is about to witness the final end of their social experimentation in amoral democracy, they are about to become a nation ruled by wolves and hounded out of their homes.  I am hoping to find some way to have an alternative system where at least I and other like minded people can be safe and advance and thrive.