Search the Community

THE FALLEN KESTREL: A CRITIQUE OF SANOIST POLITICAL ECONOMY WRITTEN BY Elibar'indor W. Halcourt PUBLISHED BY The Northern Geographical Society Press SUPERVISOR Dr. Otto Wittenbach 6th of Sun's Smile 36 2E ((Click here to access the better formatted Google Docs version.)) Abstract This essay serves as an in-depth analysis of political economist Bell Sano’s late literary works, when he cultivated a syncretic philosophy combining elements of Canonist morality, democratic ideals, and economic collectivism. While normative views and subjective opinions will be expressed regarding the values of Sanoism, this essay will primarily criticize how coherent, consistent, and logical the rationality of Bell Sano’s essays are. Instead of answering the question “is Sanoism good or bad,” this essay will instead try to answer, “are Bell Sano’s writings rooted in sound economic, political, and theological analysis?” Introduction: The Context of Bell Sano’s Personal Life Bell Sano, full name Bell Cranel Acaele’par Rider Sano, is responsible for the cultivation of a controversial and archaic political philosophy known as “Sanoism,” publishing major literary works in the late 1500’s to the early 1600’s. The impact of Sanoist ideals on Imperial society as a whole, and Axios as a whole, no doubt played a significant importance in the development of philosophical academia. However, the ramifications of the Sanoist movement were likely considered undesirable by Sano, as it served more to polarize the denizens of the Empire and established a paranoia of worker-oriented activism, rather than to revolutionize the proletariat as he had hoped. Sanoism began with an alluring promise; to retain the cultural and religious values of Oren whilst simultaneously empowering the working class, democratizing Imperial society, and creating a more just world for those who were the most marginalized. So how did a decorated military sergeant and respected defense attorney so swiftly become a disgraced academic and near-convicted felon? Bell Sano had a disastrously tragic childhood. Originally born Bell Acaele’par to a drunkard woman in Felsen, his father was a wealthy aristocrat with no interest in the life of his bastard child. Sano’s maternal grandfather, Galen, raised young Bell in the elven dominion of Laureh’lin, to which the origins of Bell’s name can be attributed (it is assumed that Galen thought a human child would better acclimate to elven culture with a more appropriate name.) Upon the death of his grandfather some six years later, the child was placed with the Sano family in the port town of Luceinsport to be raised by an Orenian metal worker and his wife, Vincent and Margaret Sano, along with his adopted sister, Kaitlyn. Sano was raised in an impoverished household with strict Canonist values, and served as an altar boy at the local Cathedral of Saint Adrian until the age of seventeen. At this point, he fled to the College of Skyfall to receive a formal education. During his formal education, Sano made little contribution to the world of academia, mostly writing missives regarding human military history. Bell Sano truly began to cultivate his political ideals when serving as an eventual Senior Sergeant in Felsen and Johannesburg. Sano participated in the De Rolle Rebellion in Felsen, wherein commandant Markese de Rolle led a brief rebellion to establish a democratic free state within the confines of the city of Felsen (which notably had a municipal flag bearing a blue kestrel, the symbol now closely associated to Sanoist thought.) Fast forward to 1580, wherein Sano published what was the cultivation of decades upon decades of financial stress, contempt towards the Imperial hierarchy, and a sincere belief that the homogenization of competing religious traditions was a hindrance on society. The initial publication of the Sanoist Manifesto sparked no reason for alarm amongst the Imperial establishment, until working-class organizations began to hold public rallies and aired a notable anti-capitalist sentiment. Bell Sano’s ideas influenced the minds of men both in worker’s organizations and in high Imperial society. More notable historical figures who adopted Sanoist sympathies included the Mayor of Metz, Victor Clarke, who became a fierce Sanoist revolutionary, in addition to the political giant Alexandre d’Aryn, who later dismissed his Sanoist leanings. However, the most historically notable Sanoist was supposedly High Pontiff Everard IV, who reportedly kept a copy of the Sanoist Manifesto in his desk. It was at this time the Imperial Anti-Orenian Activities Committee banned all of Sano’s texts from Imperial libraries and subpoenaed over two dozen alleged Sanoist conspirators. Faced with charges of incitement, treason, and the intent to distribute felonious literature, Bell Sano entered a plea arrangement with the IAAC in which he sacrificed the names of core Sanoist activists in exchange for legal immunity. After being disgraced by his working-class colleagues, Sano spent the rest of his life between Johannesburg and Alban working as an attorney, making numerous attempts to further inspire workers to no avail. He died an old man in Alban, reportedly to a drunken Halfling, shortly after publishing one last critical piece of literature; the Sanoist Compendium. The legacy of Sanoism today has a minimal impact on the political climate of Almaris. It has since been banished to the archives of history, considered an outdated and stale ideology which has no place in contemporary discourse. Modern Sanoist organizations tend to see little to no success in creating meaningful change in public policy, elections, or legislation. The most successful attempt was by the Sanoist Republican Party in the Duma of Haense, which attempted to establish a worker-led economy in Haense. For three consecutive terms, they composed the majority of the Duma and enacted agricultural land reform, introduced fierce social programs, and reformed elections to offer more democratic representation to the electorate. They were led by Alderman Fabius Braccus, who later became a renown statesman, alongside other notable political minds such as Maer Butch, Konstantin Ruthern, and Henrik Amador. This attempt at a Sanoist political party would prove to be the most successful, but alas, ultimately failed. For what reasons did the general population find Sanoism to be unfavorable? Was it simply the result of propaganda and Imperial intimidation, as suggested by Sano, or was his literature not nearly as attractive as he’d previously thought? Upon further analysis of both the Sanoist Manifesto and the Sanoist Compendium, there appear to be logical inconsistencies and fringe ideas which were framed in such a way that it could appeal only to the worker who was already radicalized prior to its publication. Bell Sano was a fiery, anti-establishment radical who saw success with the Sanoist movement by token of sheer luck, and not on the merits of his flawed, inconsistent, and incoherent ideology. Economic Illiteracy The first value which Bell Sano seems to struggle to ascertain is whether or not his ideology is favorable or unfavorable towards the private ownership of capital. Nominally, Bell Sano is a definitive socialist who vows to dismantle the oppressive nature of capitalist society. In his texts, however, Sano comes off as if he is unsure whether or not total collective ownership of the means of production are a positive aspect for Imperial society. He writes, “When we discuss a socialist hybrid state, we are referring to a hybrid economy between core elements of free exchange and socialism. When it comes to dealing with the element of trade in society, market regulation is a requirement. A major stride must be made, placing an emphasis on workers rights, if we wish to alter society for the better. While small business firms are encouraged to provide services, products, and above all, jobs, it is still the duty of the state to impose regulatory policies onto these private entities, so that the tyranny of greed does not harm the worker.” (The Sanoist Compendium, 1619, pg. 3) Here lies the primary issue; does Sano advocate for what he describes as a ‘socialist’ society, wherein the working class would own capital instead of private businessmen, or does he believe that elements of capitalism and feudalism do not infringe upon the liberation of workers so long as the state regulates them accordingly? The compromise position in Sano’s texts seem to be a “socialist hybrid state,” as he calls it. Under this “hybrid” state, he describes an economic system in which some industries ought to be privatized, and others should be revolutionized to overthrow the capitalist owners and institute worker control. He continues; “The workers, however, have the total right to seize control of the owner’s production if that industry cannot manage a private mode of production. In other words, socialist policies are to be employed when they assist the working class to its fullest. It simply depends on what industries the state decides to collectivize the services or goods being distributed. In the case of healthcare, education, and national security, for example, socialism and collectivism is undoubtedly the answer. In the cases of consumer goods and other services, regulated markets with workers’ rights being considered is superior. The determining factor as to what should be privatized, and what should be left to the state, is weighing the value of competition against potential conflicts of interest.” (pg. 3) I have no doubt that Bell Sano was a competent scholar who is able to correctly define the tenets of both socialism and capitalism correctly (whereas so many politicians and legal minds in Imperial society incorrectly define both). However, he appears to create some sort of compromise between total revolution and regulation of existing capitalist institutions which cannot exist. “Hybrid socialism” is an ignorami’s way of stating, “I am going to call this institution socialism, but in truth, I am merely regulating capitalism to make it more beneficial towards the working class.” There is nothing inherently wrong with this position, but it is not, in fact, socialist; social democracy mayhaps, but more accurately this would be defined as a state capitalist society. Seemingly, Sano has mistaken “the government enacting social programs” with “socialism.” He correctly identifies overthrowing the private owners in some industries as a key component of what socialist society is meant to be, but that does not amount to socialism if the commodity form still exists, and if the subjective theory of value is still codified into public policy. How, then, can Sano call this a socialist institution? Hierarchy Bell Sano is unclear on the extent to which a political hierarchy should exist. In one breath, he decries the existing structure of Imperial society to be a scourge and a plague on common society, but in the next he makes excuses to retain the existence of various capitalist hierarchies which supposedly fuel the oppression of the working class he alludes to. As already mentioned, Sano is not a proponent of total democratization of society despite his own claims, as he views private ownership of capital acceptable. But outside of the realm of industry, he also views the existence of royalty in public institutions as acceptable, despite earlier claims which call for their total demise. In the preface of his Compendium, he writes, “For too long, the hierarchical monstrosity which is political entitlement has plagued our glorious societies. The issue of political and social inequity is one which transcends racial divides, garnering scorn from all nations, all ethnicities, and all workers. The concept of royalty and entitlement has done nothing more than establish an unequal and unfair societal structure. Sanoism is the cure to this plague.” (pg. 2) Evidently, this is a strong statement to make in the era predating the existence of electoral bodies in the Empire. However, he will later douse his fiery rhetoric with excuses for the existence of the monarchy, which can essentially be summed up as, “It doesn’t matter as much as these other things.” “The extent to which the people have direct control over the government, nor how it is implemented, does not matter; all which truly matters is that Sano law is put into place, while the people are represented by their state. . . However, it is not unacceptable in a Sanoist society to permit a monarch, so long as he or she is to voice the will of the people.” (pg. 9) I cannot fathom how a supposed republican, who previously described the noble class and Imperial royalty as a ‘plague,’ could also accept the existence of a monarch so long as they’re ‘one of the nice ones’ who enacts the will of their constituents. Albeit, he does later detail that the existence of a parliamentary society under a monarch with legal checks and balances would be satisfactory, which is more or less the condition of Imperial society today, but that does not close the holes in his radical rhetoric. If I were a worker, I too would be relatively confused by the dramatic shift in tone. The rest of the section on republicanism in the Sanoist Compendium is a long-winded analysis of how exactly an electoral system would be established to most effectively garner the consent of the governed, but nowhere does it address this major flaw in Sanoist philosophy. Xenophobic Multiculturalism A major reason for Bell Sano’s failure to reach major components of his ideology outside of human spheres is that he is only a progressive icon in his rhetoric, but an incredible xenophobe in practice. Sano describes his proposed society as being incredibly welcoming of foreigners who assimilate into Canonist society, including other descendants. He is all-inclusive of individuals who show a great love and patriotism for Oren, regardless of their original nationalities and race. Later, though, he has this to say about immigration; “The creation of an ideal, Sanoist society must be safeguarded by strict borders, patriotism, and a national military -- otherwise, if we create such a glorious nation, what is to stop greedy foreigners from plundering our accomplishments, and shattering the great works of the proletariat?” (pg. 7) How does this unabashed xenophobic rhetoric fall in line with his supposed egalitarian principles? My assumption is that this was merely an attempt to attract the largely human population of the Empire at the time to his leftist ideas, and to dismiss any accusations of attempting to undermine Imperial values by integrating anti-immigrant rhetoric into his writings. It is also noted in secondary accounts with Bell Sano that he believed the Kharajyr to be of an inferior life form, below that of both descendants and animal. For this reason, I am entirely unsure of where his position on immigration is situated; is a multiracial, religiously homogeneous society desirable, or are immigrants a threat to the proletariat? Would those immigrants, given that they are Orenain patriots and Canonists, not also become a part of that proletarian society? Conclusion I do not wonder why it is that Sanoism was unable to gain significant traction amongst its target audience. The language used is convoluted, unclear, and conflicts with itself. If you were to revive Bell Sano and ask him where things went wrong, my assumption is that he would wholeheartedly defend his actions, declare that he did nothing wrong, and call you an Imperial conspirator who had fallen for propaganda aimed to keep the proletariat complacent in their oppression. I do not inherently disagree with all of Sano’s nominal ideals and principles, some are even considered mainstream today. However, it is clear that Bell Sano was incapable of defining his own position on fundamental questions about how Imperial society should operate, and the major flaws in his literature will forever leave Sanoism as an irrelevant footnote in history, subject to study only by scholars in political theory and fringe radicals.