Plato's bureaucracy cave (english)
La version Française va paraître en septembre 2010
Doetinchem Tax and Customs Administration De Hutte Holding
Attn. Mr X.X Xxxxxxxxxx c/o Roquetaillade
Postbus 9024 12490 MONTJAUX
7000 HE DOETINCHEM France
6 April 2007
Your reference: 64.57.602 (should this not be 64.57.502?)
Your letter dated: 26 March 2007
Re.: Notice of objection to assessment 64.57.502.V.70.0112
I would like to thank you for your letter dated 26 March, which I received this week on 3 April. The issue raised in the notice of objection should not be underestimated, or as you put it, “The issue that you bring up is an issue that goes beyond this notice of objection”. To a certain degree you are completely right and it should not be lying on your desk. It is more a matter for a constitutional court or other legal body that checks and reviews constitutional matters.
At the same time, the issue raised goes beyond a Dutch or even a European context. Thus, sooner or later the question will arise whether there is an independent body at all that can objectively look at the issue of the justification for requesting and paying interest, let alone administer justice on it, because:
How can you question something when you are simultaneously dependent on and subject to it? How do you file a complaint against something, when the body that has to judge it is dependent on it for its own financial survival?
How do you lodge a complaint against something that feeds millions of families, on the one hand, but excludes billions of people and/or makes them dependent, on the other?
Can we raise our own consciousness and call ourselves to account or can we only condemn others? Incidentally, the latter is logical in a world that believes in competition between people and paper profit.
How can we communicate openly and fairly about justice when the belief in competition, growth and profit has become more important than respect for humanity, society and the planet we live on?
How do you question something when in politics, commerce, justice and religion we have unintentionally made it common practice to make and keep people dependent?
Is there anything or anyone responsible at all in Dutch or European society, where we now consider it economic to be competitors? Who is responsible for the public and social interests and individual independence?
In your letter dated 26 March you say, “If you want to change the law, or, more generally, if you want to influence developments within society, you will have to convince a parliamentary majority within the current establishment of your point of view”.
There is no point in trying “to change the law”; rather, the challenge is "being able and permitted to live in the spirit of the law" and creating the practical conditions required for it. We are currently formulating hundreds of rules and laws to “keep everyone satisfied” and try to fix something that was broken from the start.
Because what is the origin of our mountain of laws and regulations? Party A (EURL Petit Château de Roquetaillade Aveyron), the one paying interest is not as well protected as Party B (de Hutte Holding BV), the one demanding the interest. As a result, we have unintentionally managed to make the bureaucratisation of society the most important priority for the economy. We have, therefore, imprisoned the economy (and politics) in a two-dimensional world of growth and paper profit that is not capable of differentiating between social priorities. After all, profit is profit no matter where it comes from.
For example, as a football lover I occasionally watch a game; the competition is exciting, the spectators come flocking in, the stadium is full, which is good for the (current approach of the) economy. Economically speaking, though, nothing has happened; we were entertained and that’s it. Reducing the economy to a two-dimensional priority conceals the danger of humanity alienating itself from reality. And that is what we experience in today’s world: having our lives lived for us, powerless to change something for the better.
You write that I should address parliament, but they will say, “We are a small country and at this point we do not have much to say on the matter”. If we were to go to Europe, we would hear the same, “This goes beyond our responsibility and should only be examined at a global level”. The UN? Solution in sight? No, because we are (potential) competitors, so we will continue to fight for our own individual survival. So we allow fear to reign! Can a constructive breakthrough be made in such a situation?
No, because as long as we are competitors, an open and balanced dialogue will never come about and mutual trust will slowly but surely disappear completely. The mechanism at the basis for all of this is our belief in profit. This means that we automatically also create losers. Humanly efficient and economical?
Plato’s bureaucracy cave
Party A works, does business and borrows money. Party B receives money under the protection of the law (In practice, this means that the law itself produces money – a miracle?). That way A and B keep themselves and each other captive, leaving them unable to find C, the exit, even if we would like to.
Equal opportunities, just and economic, or simply a mundane institutionalised bureaucratic abuse of power?
Instead of being the guardian of public interest, the government has unintentionally become the “mafia boss”, chronically hazarding safety and mutual trust in society and protecting the out-of-control bureaucratisation against an everyday, independently functioning democracy, a responsible constitutional state and a healthier living environment.
The assessment is based on profit that is too high, as it consists of a bureaucratic illusion, an arithmetical leverage at interest, profit, dividend, etc. The illusion that has alienated us from reality. In this situation we cannot hide behind a parliamentary majority or hundreds of laws and regulations for subsequent compensation, given that the law and article 1 in particular are not currently being complied with.
All persons in the Netherlands shall be treated equally in equal circumstances. Discrimination on the grounds of religion, belief, political opinion, race or sex or on any other grounds whatsoever shall not be permitted.
Economic apartheid and discrimination are the drivers of the current politico-economic system with the government as the so-called impartial policymaker and the legal system as independent referee. But, by opting for mutual competition, the government unintentionally opts for the winners. Gone are impartiality, independence, individual and collective responsibility. Are we simply system guards or are we, from the office we hold, trying to independently make a contribution to healing a society striving for justice? Because it is there, no matter how modest, as a gopher or gasbag, as a civil servant or prime minister, that democracy begins and nowhere else, no matter what the ladies and gentlemen in politics try to tell us and them.
Your intention to dismiss the notice of objection is humanly understandable, but it illustrates the social prison that we have created, in which the system decides for the people, who are only capable of guarding the system, thereby denying their own possible contribution and leaving democracy and the constitution irretrievably behind. Of course, the issues raised in this notice of objection should ultimately be discussed in parliament, but when ordinary people saddle institutional democracy with their responsibilities, the very basis of everyday democracy of, for and by the people is on its deathbed.
This notice of objection seeks to democratise the economy, to free it from its two-dimensional bureaucratic prison. This notice of objection, then, does not intend to change the law, but to take it seriously. For the sake of clarity, I do not agree with your intention to dismiss this notice of objection, protecting bureaucracy at the expense of free and integrated entrepreneurship that benefits society. We can certainly laugh at that, especially at ourselves and our game of bureaucratic hide-and seek.
De Hutte Holding BV