Based on current events, I am going to offer a prediction: that before there is any revolution or renewal there will be a revolt sparked by a drastic spike in the cost and decline in the quality of.....
I feel like I'd been waiting for someone to put this into words, and yet, I am still uncertain what to do with the words. I am glad you started this conversation though.
is “democratic renewal” the “FDR-as-president type of leader in a Constitutional Republic who can marshal the intellectual precariat to work for said leader and within said leader’s vision as a federal employee” path? A “New Deal 2.0”?
Mike - this is an excellent post. Where do you think the current center of mass is for democratic renewal? Or is there one even?
BTW - as written, this part below is an undeserved complement. Authoritarians ultimately value loyalty over competence. We would certainly get a loyalty system, but no guarantee of competence.
"If the answer is fascism—if they decide democracy failed and hierarchy is the answer—we get not chaos, but competence..."
Yeah. I hear what you're saying. But I actually do think a lot of the fascists waiting to step up after Trump *are* competent at running organizations, and at engineering and technology. And that makes them particularly dangerous and scary. I'm not talking about Trump and MAGA, here.
Competence is not a generic trait. One can be a competent engineer and a complete failure as a team manager, etc. Fascism flourishes in chaos, and while it offers a presence of competence in all areas of social life, it creates in illusion of stability by causing chaos—“things are are going wrong, but we are on the job.”
Is democratic renewal the Bernie/AOC path or similar or did you have something else in mind? And who is the revolutionary left? Mostly DSA? or are they keeping low profile right now?
Your section about the left uses just the example of DSA. Meanwhile Mamdani, DSA member, is running decidedly within the democratic system in NYC. After all, they're the _Democratic_ Socialists, which places them in roughly the same place as Sen. Sanders, whose version of "socialism" is the Scandinavian ideal of a mixed economy.
The Weather Underground disbanded long ago. The anti-WTO protests years back had some anarchist kids at the core of it, as I know from sitting in on one of their meetings in the East Village back when; in the current Indivisible meetings I've attended that cohort isn't represented at all. I think you'll find worker-owned businesses, B Corporations, grocery co-ops, universal health care, coupled with commitment to green energy, are enough "revolution" for what's left of the "radical" left -- that and ending Trumpist fascism with a return to democracy. I really don't see what you're scared of on this wing of your ideological mapping.
I don't think the DSA is inherently dangerous. I really meant to use it as a bellwether indicator. I am a liberal, after all. I can agree we need more social democracy. But I have my own critiques of socialist theory.
Looks to me like the socialism-or-capitalism and democracy-or-fascism axes are at 90% to each other. There are socialist-fascists, but also socialist-democrats; as there are capitalist-fascists (IG Farben, Elon's X) and capitalist-democrats (FDR, Ben & Jerry). That there will be tension between socialists and capitalists is healthy in a democratic society. Both sets of theories support some useful social and economic structures. Diversity in theory makes for better social and economic ecology.
Tension between socialism and capitalism is indeed natural, and the center must be held; well-regulated markets with abundant social services for things where capitalism is actively harmful (e.g. health care). There should be no “tension” between democracy and fascism; such tension is inherently harmful.
This author (Mike Brock) and his publication (Notes from the Circus) has captured possible outcomes for political models that might evolve in a rather direct fashion capable of altering the current raging social/political/economic distress we are living with today. Impressive, truly. Still, I suggest his choices can be distilled even further.
From a marketing standpoint, why not create a “Revolution for Dummies” handbook approach, if you get my drift. I say that with some humor, but mostly with sincere respect for the idea that “choosing the democratic path” is the only way to go. It would also be the easiest and most successful choice if humanity can ever get over its “I must be rich and powerful” obsession, instead of merely wanting to be “safe, happy and challenged to do our best.”
Such a goal, to succeed however, will need to be presented front and center and offered without religious overtones to be credible and appeal to all. It shall require that we become kinder, smarter, and less individually self-absorbed. It will necessitate goals that have a qualitative difference beyond just the desire for affordable housing and health insurance and having nice things and a zillion choices. I am up for that challenge, but I am old. If the young desperate, educated elites Mr. Brock describes as most capable to lead the political revolution choose to promote more substance for democracy and are willing to settle for fewer personal physical possessions than previous (but mostly recent) American generations have come to enjoy, then we have a shot to sustain democratic rule. That is truly the political challenge all of us on planet earth face going forward. There is no way to sugarcoat the expectations for our future generations AND preserve democracy. Democracy must be based on truth and courage, or it simply will not exist.
I believe genuinely in rewarding hard work, excellence, and unique contributions by individuals. I believe in tolerance and respect for individuality. That said, I also want safety, peace, justice, fairness, and equal protection under the law. I am an American and believe democracy is the best means to achieve all these goals. I am also an adult and recognize I shall not “have everything I want”. These two thoughts can be held and credible at the same time.
MANY thanks for this piece. It is, as you say, rare as yet to see my own economic experience framed as the structural/demographic issue it is. (Altho I was annoyed when it first posted to see that it was subscriber-only ~ you .are. speaking to a PRECARIAT audience after all lol Happy now to be able to read it in full, tho.)
Unfortunately at least part of this precariat risks being overwhelmed by the same economic desperation as the working-class folks, if we're poor enough for long enough. Speaking as someone recently laid off from my part-time culture-sector nonprofit job, which seems to be the best anyone with only two master's degrees in demanding academic disciplines can expect from my anti-intellectual purple Midwestern state. But as you say, its better at least to have the skills to understand the systems oppressing you. Now for the "knowledge = power" part, right? Please keep up the focus on this!
So who is the organization/person/idea that you feel should be initiating the call to action for these people and the concept of renewal. I also find it interesting that you feel the liberal policies have to be torn down. Do you mean health care, women’s rights ????
Peter Turchin’s End Times (2023) has much to add to this discussion. This may not be about protecting democracy, rather it may be a regular cycle, ever present, and not specific political system dependent, observed over thousands of years.
Elite over production, mass immiseration, and predictable collapse are the norm, not the exception.
I'm happy with my frame of reference. I tend to frame things around the agency of people who are making decisions and doing things. Excusing what's happening now, because of what happened in the past, what leftists said or did, is blame-shifting.
“Dominant technologies change all the time, nature of the beast,” you say, and then you go off on a wild tangent about transgender people and DEI that reveals your true agenda; that some people are, in your view, less equal than others.
“What makes you think that society or the government owes them any sort of a career in the face of such changes? Particularly when so many should be destined for the Ark B” is pretty revealing as well; that pursuing one’s passion and advancing human knowledge and understanding makes one unworthy of being on this planet.
May you die of a disease contracted from a dirty telephone.
So it’s not that Lia competes, it’s that there is a barbaric, backward segment of society that is so stuck in puritanical Old Testament thinking that it can’t handle the thought of seeing our bodies as the wonderful, varied, often baffling biological machines that they are. The thought that they might see another person’s genitalia freaks them out, and seeing something unexpected absolutely terrifies them.
Your use of “transactivist” is another giveaway; you treat this as a new thing when trans individuals have been around throughout history (just as homosexuals have). It’s just that now we have the knowledge and skill to change the body to match the identity, and that scares the crap out of you.
From deep personal experience, it is never as simple as genetic determinists would have you believe, that X+X=F and X+Y=M. It’s not about “transactivism”, it’s about treating people who have found that their identity does not conform to your preconceived notions no differently than anyone else.
Based on current events, I am going to offer a prediction: that before there is any revolution or renewal there will be a revolt sparked by a drastic spike in the cost and decline in the quality of.....
cocaine.
Okay. You made me laugh. 😆
I'm glad. I felt you needed it.
I feel like I'd been waiting for someone to put this into words, and yet, I am still uncertain what to do with the words. I am glad you started this conversation though.
is “democratic renewal” the “FDR-as-president type of leader in a Constitutional Republic who can marshal the intellectual precariat to work for said leader and within said leader’s vision as a federal employee” path? A “New Deal 2.0”?
“Meatspace” sounds kind of gross, I prefer the “dirt world” but I’m old.
Mike - this is an excellent post. Where do you think the current center of mass is for democratic renewal? Or is there one even?
BTW - as written, this part below is an undeserved complement. Authoritarians ultimately value loyalty over competence. We would certainly get a loyalty system, but no guarantee of competence.
"If the answer is fascism—if they decide democracy failed and hierarchy is the answer—we get not chaos, but competence..."
Yeah. I hear what you're saying. But I actually do think a lot of the fascists waiting to step up after Trump *are* competent at running organizations, and at engineering and technology. And that makes them particularly dangerous and scary. I'm not talking about Trump and MAGA, here.
Competence is not a generic trait. One can be a competent engineer and a complete failure as a team manager, etc. Fascism flourishes in chaos, and while it offers a presence of competence in all areas of social life, it creates in illusion of stability by causing chaos—“things are are going wrong, but we are on the job.”
Is democratic renewal the Bernie/AOC path or similar or did you have something else in mind? And who is the revolutionary left? Mostly DSA? or are they keeping low profile right now?
I don't think Bernie or AOC are revolutionary left, no. But the RevLeft is mixed in there. And I worry about them.
Your section about the left uses just the example of DSA. Meanwhile Mamdani, DSA member, is running decidedly within the democratic system in NYC. After all, they're the _Democratic_ Socialists, which places them in roughly the same place as Sen. Sanders, whose version of "socialism" is the Scandinavian ideal of a mixed economy.
The Weather Underground disbanded long ago. The anti-WTO protests years back had some anarchist kids at the core of it, as I know from sitting in on one of their meetings in the East Village back when; in the current Indivisible meetings I've attended that cohort isn't represented at all. I think you'll find worker-owned businesses, B Corporations, grocery co-ops, universal health care, coupled with commitment to green energy, are enough "revolution" for what's left of the "radical" left -- that and ending Trumpist fascism with a return to democracy. I really don't see what you're scared of on this wing of your ideological mapping.
I don't think the DSA is inherently dangerous. I really meant to use it as a bellwether indicator. I am a liberal, after all. I can agree we need more social democracy. But I have my own critiques of socialist theory.
Looks to me like the socialism-or-capitalism and democracy-or-fascism axes are at 90% to each other. There are socialist-fascists, but also socialist-democrats; as there are capitalist-fascists (IG Farben, Elon's X) and capitalist-democrats (FDR, Ben & Jerry). That there will be tension between socialists and capitalists is healthy in a democratic society. Both sets of theories support some useful social and economic structures. Diversity in theory makes for better social and economic ecology.
Tension between socialism and capitalism is indeed natural, and the center must be held; well-regulated markets with abundant social services for things where capitalism is actively harmful (e.g. health care). There should be no “tension” between democracy and fascism; such tension is inherently harmful.
This author (Mike Brock) and his publication (Notes from the Circus) has captured possible outcomes for political models that might evolve in a rather direct fashion capable of altering the current raging social/political/economic distress we are living with today. Impressive, truly. Still, I suggest his choices can be distilled even further.
From a marketing standpoint, why not create a “Revolution for Dummies” handbook approach, if you get my drift. I say that with some humor, but mostly with sincere respect for the idea that “choosing the democratic path” is the only way to go. It would also be the easiest and most successful choice if humanity can ever get over its “I must be rich and powerful” obsession, instead of merely wanting to be “safe, happy and challenged to do our best.”
Such a goal, to succeed however, will need to be presented front and center and offered without religious overtones to be credible and appeal to all. It shall require that we become kinder, smarter, and less individually self-absorbed. It will necessitate goals that have a qualitative difference beyond just the desire for affordable housing and health insurance and having nice things and a zillion choices. I am up for that challenge, but I am old. If the young desperate, educated elites Mr. Brock describes as most capable to lead the political revolution choose to promote more substance for democracy and are willing to settle for fewer personal physical possessions than previous (but mostly recent) American generations have come to enjoy, then we have a shot to sustain democratic rule. That is truly the political challenge all of us on planet earth face going forward. There is no way to sugarcoat the expectations for our future generations AND preserve democracy. Democracy must be based on truth and courage, or it simply will not exist.
I believe genuinely in rewarding hard work, excellence, and unique contributions by individuals. I believe in tolerance and respect for individuality. That said, I also want safety, peace, justice, fairness, and equal protection under the law. I am an American and believe democracy is the best means to achieve all these goals. I am also an adult and recognize I shall not “have everything I want”. These two thoughts can be held and credible at the same time.
MANY thanks for this piece. It is, as you say, rare as yet to see my own economic experience framed as the structural/demographic issue it is. (Altho I was annoyed when it first posted to see that it was subscriber-only ~ you .are. speaking to a PRECARIAT audience after all lol Happy now to be able to read it in full, tho.)
Unfortunately at least part of this precariat risks being overwhelmed by the same economic desperation as the working-class folks, if we're poor enough for long enough. Speaking as someone recently laid off from my part-time culture-sector nonprofit job, which seems to be the best anyone with only two master's degrees in demanding academic disciplines can expect from my anti-intellectual purple Midwestern state. But as you say, its better at least to have the skills to understand the systems oppressing you. Now for the "knowledge = power" part, right? Please keep up the focus on this!
So who is the organization/person/idea that you feel should be initiating the call to action for these people and the concept of renewal. I also find it interesting that you feel the liberal policies have to be torn down. Do you mean health care, women’s rights ????
Peter Turchin’s End Times (2023) has much to add to this discussion. This may not be about protecting democracy, rather it may be a regular cycle, ever present, and not specific political system dependent, observed over thousands of years.
Elite over production, mass immiseration, and predictable collapse are the norm, not the exception.
Franco Berardi stirs suicide into this semio-inflationary stew of time, money, and language
where irony or cynicism are no longer effective
The Soul at Work
Precarious Rhapsodies
The Uprising
thanks for this excellent post
How does the Khmer Rouge fit in to your analysis?
I think you might have missed my point.
I've been PRETTY critical of the left in my recent writing. I have no idea what you're talking about.
I'm happy with my frame of reference. I tend to frame things around the agency of people who are making decisions and doing things. Excusing what's happening now, because of what happened in the past, what leftists said or did, is blame-shifting.
“Dominant technologies change all the time, nature of the beast,” you say, and then you go off on a wild tangent about transgender people and DEI that reveals your true agenda; that some people are, in your view, less equal than others.
“What makes you think that society or the government owes them any sort of a career in the face of such changes? Particularly when so many should be destined for the Ark B” is pretty revealing as well; that pursuing one’s passion and advancing human knowledge and understanding makes one unworthy of being on this planet.
May you die of a disease contracted from a dirty telephone.
To quote my other response:
So it’s not that Lia competes, it’s that there is a barbaric, backward segment of society that is so stuck in puritanical Old Testament thinking that it can’t handle the thought of seeing our bodies as the wonderful, varied, often baffling biological machines that they are. The thought that they might see another person’s genitalia freaks them out, and seeing something unexpected absolutely terrifies them.
To switch franchises: IDIC.
Your use of “transactivist” is another giveaway; you treat this as a new thing when trans individuals have been around throughout history (just as homosexuals have). It’s just that now we have the knowledge and skill to change the body to match the identity, and that scares the crap out of you.
From deep personal experience, it is never as simple as genetic determinists would have you believe, that X+X=F and X+Y=M. It’s not about “transactivism”, it’s about treating people who have found that their identity does not conform to your preconceived notions no differently than anyone else.
“The people…the things…”
“The things are also people.”
“The people…the…other people…”