Lives Journal 7

Rajko Shushtarshich






»But Jesus also showed many other values;

their free path and the path to reach them;

if we described them all, I believe:

the whole world would not have room for the books,

that should be written.«


»Not even the whole world would have enough room for the books,

that should be written about love alone.

And are not already nowadays most books of the sort,

that speak about love, that are its record,

testimony of the heart that speaks sincerely.« 1a_


R.Sh. interpr. Jn 21.2


What do we actually think of when we talk about values, when we name some value? Let us take as an example three values: love, truth and freedom, but we could take any other common value.




Whoever has truly loved, knows there is no answer; just by saying it we devalue it. However, the greatest number of books has been written precisely about love. (See moto 1a_, 1a).





The Nazarene did not answer Pilate’s question. Actually, he responded with silence.

»Pilate: What is the truth?

Jesus did not answer him. Pilate would not have understood. He understood

the truth of power.

They were both silent and conversed in silence.

In silence Pilate makes his steps, turns to the Jews, and says to them: I find no basis for a charge against him 1b_ ,1b





But when people do not like it, they prefer voluntary slavery said Étienne de La Boétie, Voluntary slavery:


»Freedom alone is what the people do not want and it seems to be so,

with one sole reason:

if we wanted it, we would have it;

they reject freedom, this jewel,

because it can too easily be reached.«



»The nation is subjugating itself,

the same nation, which could,


between subjugation and freedom.»1c


We experience the values dealt with here as immediate data of our consciousness, in other words, for us values are immediately comprehensible facts, we understand them with intuitive certainty. Other common (common human) values are equally comprehensible. And what does this commonness of values actually mean?

Values are common – they have a common validity – they are valid for all people. They are the same and are valid just as much for every person that has lived before us, and will be equally valid for all people that will live after us. Otherwise they would not be common. But that is not all, common values are valid in duration, not in space and time.

But man can understand them; they are only valid for him if the individual chooses them to be his own. In other words, when he allows them to adopt him, lead him (to be his value orientation).


However, humanity evolves according to completely different values. Let us not forget, the system value of development is only the dynamic aspect of the value of the hierarchy. Put more simply, it is the modality of the same value. (Much was written about this in Values of the system VII)2; there was also something small in my rather utopian article, Humanity could evolve differently.3


It is certain, however, that the system is not evolving according to declarative values (values that have been declared supreme); these are useful for system manipulation, they are valid only for the naive, for naive periods of human history. Sooner or later they wear thin – they become exhausted and leave an emptiness in their wake, followed by rapid oblivion, and in between, an infinite quantity of human adversity.


I would say that the system is developing according to socially valid values, but which are normally contrary to the declarative values.

Which ones are stronger? It is certain that socially valid (actual or here values) values of systems are dominant, the over-dominant subsystems in them. Humanity is therefore evolving into ever-increasing hierarchisation. The lust for power (domination) is unstoppable. The strong and mighty cannot be stopped; a potential revolution should neither be desired nor expected. We could only stop ourselves, only some of them could possibly manage this, in order to allow the common values in them to awaken. This thought is obviously utopian.

However, the individual can at least choose which type of values he will yield to, while the system (the system human) cannot do this. He is caught in the noose of his instrumental values, which form his basis and actually also lead him.

The individual can choose common values. But where is then the individuality of the common values (?), for they are generally valid after all. They are the same for Socrates for example and for some individual of the future. The individuality of common values is in the unique permeation of individual values, which is unrepeatable – it is the one-off uniqueness of the individual. Just as no two persons have the same genetic makeup, no two individuals have the same value of adoption – the same value orientations which are unique for each person.

However, none of this is valid for the transmitted, instrumental values. We can accept them, believe in them, act according to them, or more precisely, they act with us, straighten us out, direct us, but all this is of short duration. The transformation from one type of values to the other is a constituent component of our everyday life. Alternations in ideas, especially political ideas, and all kinds of metamorphoses are our social consciousness, our spiritual nourishment, the system feeds us with it - copiously. The system keeps transforming us.


So choose (!) those of you that can choose:


Human values or values of the system?

Human evolvement or the evolution of humanity? The permeation of institutional values with common values is not possible. The institutional value annuls the common value – it instrumentalises it.


I have tried in very simplified form to summarise the differentiation of system and common values. We give them the same names but actually refer to completely different facts! That is why each system has specially trained experts for newspeak (agitators, spiritual guides, propagandists). There are no greater disagreements in human communication than those caused by the use of the same markers – symbols for so different and at the same time such important things (entities) for man as are human values. There is no easier manipulation with people (by the system – the system man), than this manipulation with his values.




1a John the evangelist, 21.25, from the Greek original; published by the British and Foreign Bible Society, in Ljubljana 1931:

»Jesus did many other things as well;

if every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.«

1a_ Rajko Shushtarshich, Janezovo razodetje, Pogum Revije SRP 2001/2 (Jn 21.25 v interpretaciji R.Sh.)

1b Janez evangelist, 18.38, from the Greek original:

»What is truth Pilate asks.

With this he went out again to the Jews and said:

»I find no basis for a charge against him1b_ (Jn 18.38 interpreted by R.Sh.)

1c Étienne de La Boétie, Prostovoljno suzhenjstvo /Le discours de la servitude volontaire/

(R.Sh: see also the concluding motto in Revija SRP.)

2 Rajko Shushtarshich, Vrednote (supra)sistema VII;

Deklaracija chlovekovih pravic v vrednotnem sistemu institucionalne strukture /zasnutek legitimitete chloveshtva/

O deklaraciji pravic chloveka in drzhavljana (1789, by Maximilien Robespierre)

Glede sploshne deklaracije chlovekovih pravic ZN (1948), Revija SRP 37/38, pgs. 136, 138, 144

3 Rajko Shushtarshich, Chloveshtvo bi se lahko drugache razvijalo, Revija SRP 93/94, pg. 128




Translated from Slovenian by Marko Petrovich




Slovenian (gajica)

Slovenian (bohorichica)