I am not so sure protesters lack the ability to maintain cohesion. The new farmers party in the Netherlands would apparently win the most seats if an election were held today. Trump seized control of the Republican Party essentially as a protest vote. Robert Kennedy Junior could possibly shake up the Democrats the same way – his message is literally the same as Trumps – just put more eloquently. The Canadian opposition leader’s theme is Freedom and he is attracting disaffected people – particularly young people – from across the political landscape. As the author notes – even when movements fail they can make change. I think the Canadian convoy protesters rattled the Laurentian elite badly. With clever leadership it could have shut the country down (for instance with rolling blockades of border crossings) and there were literally not enough police in the country to stop them. I doubt anyone is going to test the patience of that much of the population quite so aggressively any time soon. If they do I also think the civil disobedience will start much sooner and be even more aggressive.
haha… in Canada now days – if you are one of the long term Vax injured – they are one of the only nations in the world with a 100% effective medical solution to your problems. Medical Assisted Suicide. And even pay for it, which is good as the Bio-Pharma Industrial Complex will not, haha..
I was with you until the medical assisted suicide; a dignified end at the moment one wishes to go – with due safeguarding, nuance and legal framework in place – is nothing but humanitarian to me. And I’d happily pay for that freedom and choice too.
So what, if whoever agrees with whoever? We can form our own opinions, regardless of endorsement.
What Mary Harrington and others do is supply their own intelligent opinions which can be useful in apprehending the zeitgeist. This article is also very commendable for that reason.
The death culture is for real and Mary has contributed a lot of original thought to the subject. The implications are not pretty and speak to fundamental issues contributing to the 1848 scenario, although I was not commenting on what I agree is an excellent article.
The death culture is for real and Mary has contributed a lot of original thought to the subject. The implications are not pretty and speak to fundamental issues contributing to the 1848 scenario, although I was not commenting on what I agree is an excellent article.
So what, if whoever agrees with whoever? We can form our own opinions, regardless of endorsement.
What Mary Harrington and others do is supply their own intelligent opinions which can be useful in apprehending the zeitgeist. This article is also very commendable for that reason.
Interesting. Incrementalism is how they work.
If even young children can’t survive on their own, and be subject to abortion, it will be interesting to see how far the abortion lobby will push to extend the acceptable age for abortion, perhaps up to the age of consent…. then determined by pedophiles? That would be an interesting debate to witness.
Interesting. Incrementalism is how they work.
If even young children can’t survive on their own, and be subject to abortion, it will be interesting to see how far the abortion lobby will push to extend the acceptable age for abortion, perhaps up to the age of consent…. then determined by pedophiles? That would be an interesting debate to witness.
So the wish alone is sufficient? Financial struggles or a season of personal malaise should be considered cause enough for state-assisted self-execution?
I think you have a valid case according to this wording: “due safeguarding, nuance, and legal framework in place”. Within those details however, there’s a lot of devil and some important distinctions to be made. For example: Is the deathwish of a moment good enough for a state-hastened funeral?
But no social program like that ever maintains the promised or assumed “safeguarding, nuance and legal framework.”
As Eric Hoffer wrote almost 60 years ago,
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
So the wish alone is sufficient? Financial struggles or a season of personal malaise should be considered cause enough for state-assisted self-execution?
I think you have a valid case according to this wording: “due safeguarding, nuance, and legal framework in place”. Within those details however, there’s a lot of devil and some important distinctions to be made. For example: Is the deathwish of a moment good enough for a state-hastened funeral?
But no social program like that ever maintains the promised or assumed “safeguarding, nuance and legal framework.”
As Eric Hoffer wrote almost 60 years ago,
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
I’ve seen those mainly US vacc prop sites. Thet take any death of a young person, anywhere in the world, and add it to their crazed list. I know of a young person who committed suicide by walking into the sea, yet they have the poor person listed on their site as a vac casualty. Sums them up for me.
Can you please provide reliable-source data about long-term injury caused by covid vaccines? For extra credit: Give death and severe health outcome data for those who were vaccinated vs. those who were not.
Yes. I think I would. If. But where is the data that would make such a transformation possible for me? I will allow that such data might exist or emerge, instead of answering my own little rhetorical question myself, as you have done.
Yes. I think I would. If. But where is the data that would make such a transformation possible for me? I will allow that such data might exist or emerge, instead of answering my own little rhetorical question myself, as you have done.
Don’t say Trudeau didn’t have any solid policy achievements – he legalized cannabis, mentally ill kids and prison inmates can now legally kill themselves, you can carry around hard drugs in BC (finally!), we have a new coat of arms with a snowflake on top, and ummm … give me sec …. we gave 6 tanks to Ukraine and ummm – oh yeah a carbon tax on everything and ummm – ummm – there are lots more that I can’t think of right now but he’s been awesome
I was with you until the medical assisted suicide; a dignified end at the moment one wishes to go – with due safeguarding, nuance and legal framework in place – is nothing but humanitarian to me. And I’d happily pay for that freedom and choice too.
I’ve seen those mainly US vacc prop sites. Thet take any death of a young person, anywhere in the world, and add it to their crazed list. I know of a young person who committed suicide by walking into the sea, yet they have the poor person listed on their site as a vac casualty. Sums them up for me.
Can you please provide reliable-source data about long-term injury caused by covid vaccines? For extra credit: Give death and severe health outcome data for those who were vaccinated vs. those who were not.
Don’t say Trudeau didn’t have any solid policy achievements – he legalized cannabis, mentally ill kids and prison inmates can now legally kill themselves, you can carry around hard drugs in BC (finally!), we have a new coat of arms with a snowflake on top, and ummm … give me sec …. we gave 6 tanks to Ukraine and ummm – oh yeah a carbon tax on everything and ummm – ummm – there are lots more that I can’t think of right now but he’s been awesome
haha… in Canada now days – if you are one of the long term Vax injured – they are one of the only nations in the world with a 100% effective medical solution to your problems. Medical Assisted Suicide. And even pay for it, which is good as the Bio-Pharma Industrial Complex will not, haha..
Peter Johnson
11 months ago
I am not so sure protesters lack the ability to maintain cohesion. The new farmers party in the Netherlands would apparently win the most seats if an election were held today. Trump seized control of the Republican Party essentially as a protest vote. Robert Kennedy Junior could possibly shake up the Democrats the same way – his message is literally the same as Trumps – just put more eloquently. The Canadian opposition leader’s theme is Freedom and he is attracting disaffected people – particularly young people – from across the political landscape. As the author notes – even when movements fail they can make change. I think the Canadian convoy protesters rattled the Laurentian elite badly. With clever leadership it could have shut the country down (for instance with rolling blockades of border crossings) and there were literally not enough police in the country to stop them. I doubt anyone is going to test the patience of that much of the population quite so aggressively any time soon. If they do I also think the civil disobedience will start much sooner and be even more aggressive.
Last edited 11 months ago by Peter Johnson
Alex Carnegie
11 months ago
Interesting. I think many would agree with what I take to be the main points:
1/ Something has gone very wrong with politics in the West and especially the English speaking countries in the last two decades. The polls suggesting that an ever increasing portion of Gen Z is losing faith in democracy are only one indication.
2/ We are heading towards an inflexion point or crisis. Maybe like 1848 as the author highlights. Maybe more like the 1960s. Hopefully not like 1789. It appears Turchin was right.
3/ No one knows what will emerge after the crisis. Perhaps merely a shift in values but with little change to institutions as in the 1960s/70s. Perhaps something more traumatic and authoritarian.
If one considers the status quo unsustainable then I would prefer less commentary bewailing the passing of the golden age of prosperity and liberty and more on what changes can be expected, feared or desired. For traditional conservatives, it may be necessary to recognise that for much to remain the same, it is necessary for much to change (to misquote an Italian). For those with a more Whiggish or technocratic sensibility, it is undeniable that there needs to be more fresh thinking and debate about how we adapt and reform. De Tocqueville was right to say that is hard to know where we will end up but a good start is to work out where we want to go.
Neil Howe’s The 4th turning is here is out in august and should be worth a read. My reading of the runes – a major push for globalisation (which will fail), introduction of digital ID and CBDCs, carbon taxation/credits, agricultural concentrstion and industrialistion (vertical farrming, gmo, etc), urban intensification (smaller units, air development to concentrate human footprint), censorship on “hot button” topics, renegotition of state liabilities old vs young which will kick in sooner than people think, move to stateism – command and control economy with govt directing credit in a credit-scarce world (the boomers and their money in the markets until recently but now that’s tucked up safely to give them safer returns). At wirst I’m expecting govt default taking down much of the system incuding pensions, cbdcs as the solution to all our problems, and the introduction of UBi to compensate you for your losses provided via MMT. What could possibly go wrong? I probably just need to get out more
I agree with many of your points about the current direction of travel. The logical end point of these trends is a number of large states which are far more intrusive – in terms of the supply of credit, censorship, surveillance, etc, etc – than we are accustomed to. USA, EU, China and India being perhaps the four most important examples (with minor powers like the UK ending up as satellites, impoverished Ruritanias or roadkill).
There are, of course, lots of scenarios which could derail this outlook but the issue which intrigues me most – and I feel is insufficiently debated – is “what to do?”. If the original article was a diagnosis and your response a prognosis, we also need a prescription.
Should we accept our collective fate with resignation or are there ways to design and shape a (probably inevitable) stronger intrusive state so as to salvage as much liberty and liberalism as possible?
I agree with many of your points about the current direction of travel. The logical end point of these trends is a number of large states which are far more intrusive – in terms of the supply of credit, censorship, surveillance, etc, etc – than we are accustomed to. USA, EU, China and India being perhaps the four most important examples (with minor powers like the UK ending up as satellites, impoverished Ruritanias or roadkill).
There are, of course, lots of scenarios which could derail this outlook but the issue which intrigues me most – and I feel is insufficiently debated – is “what to do?”. If the original article was a diagnosis and your response a prognosis, we also need a prescription.
Should we accept our collective fate with resignation or are there ways to design and shape a (probably inevitable) stronger intrusive state so as to salvage as much liberty and liberalism as possible?
Neil Howe’s The 4th turning is here is out in august and should be worth a read. My reading of the runes – a major push for globalisation (which will fail), introduction of digital ID and CBDCs, carbon taxation/credits, agricultural concentrstion and industrialistion (vertical farrming, gmo, etc), urban intensification (smaller units, air development to concentrate human footprint), censorship on “hot button” topics, renegotition of state liabilities old vs young which will kick in sooner than people think, move to stateism – command and control economy with govt directing credit in a credit-scarce world (the boomers and their money in the markets until recently but now that’s tucked up safely to give them safer returns). At wirst I’m expecting govt default taking down much of the system incuding pensions, cbdcs as the solution to all our problems, and the introduction of UBi to compensate you for your losses provided via MMT. What could possibly go wrong? I probably just need to get out more
Last edited 11 months ago by Susan Grabston
Alex Carnegie
11 months ago
Interesting. I think many would agree with what I take to be the main points:
1/ Something has gone very wrong with politics in the West and especially the English speaking countries in the last two decades. The polls suggesting that an ever increasing portion of Gen Z is losing faith in democracy are only one indication.
2/ We are heading towards an inflexion point or crisis. Maybe like 1848 as the author highlights. Maybe more like the 1960s. Hopefully not like 1789. It appears Turchin was right.
3/ No one knows what will emerge after the crisis. Perhaps merely a shift in values but with little change to institutions as in the 1960s/70s. Perhaps something more traumatic and authoritarian.
If one considers the status quo unsustainable then I would prefer less commentary bewailing the passing of the golden age of prosperity and liberty and more on what changes can be expected, feared or desired. For traditional conservatives, it may be necessary to recognise that for much to remain the same, it is necessary for much to change (to misquote an Italian). For those with a more Whiggish or technocratic sensibility, it is undeniable that there needs to be more fresh thinking and debate about how we adapt and reform. De Tocqueville was right to say that is hard to know where we will end up but a good start is to work out where we want to go.
Last edited 11 months ago by Alex Carnegie
T Bone
11 months ago
One thing I really like about Unherd is its commitment to platforming diverse viewpoints.
I completely disagree with the premise of this article. I abhor the Jacobin and Marxist idea that the Ends Justify the Means. I don’t want to live in a world where people think its OK to act out violently, subvert or distort the Truth in a Machavelian/Utilitarian way to achieve an End Goal. Just because the other guy does it doesn’t make it right.
But I do think there’s value to Non-Compliance in the face of Regimes that suppress opposing viewpoints. And that’s really the entire issue in our world. We can’t debate. We have the appearance of debate but its rarely if ever done in good faith with two participants interested in understanding the folly of their own worldview.
The best ideas are not winning. You can’t have Democracy when a Universal Ideology is imposed and all political dissent is labeled conspiracy or misinformation by a Press that operates like State Media.
T Bone
11 months ago
One thing I really like about Unherd is its commitment to platforming diverse viewpoints.
I completely disagree with the premise of this article. I abhor the Jacobin and Marxist idea that the Ends Justify the Means. I don’t want to live in a world where people think its OK to act out violently, subvert or distort the Truth in a Machavelian/Utilitarian way to achieve an End Goal. Just because the other guy does it doesn’t make it right.
But I do think there’s value to Non-Compliance in the face of Regimes that suppress opposing viewpoints. And that’s really the entire issue in our world. We can’t debate. We have the appearance of debate but its rarely if ever done in good faith with two participants interested in understanding the folly of their own worldview.
The best ideas are not winning. You can’t have Democracy when a Universal Ideology is imposed and all political dissent is labeled conspiracy or misinformation by a Press that operates like State Media.
Mike Doyle
11 months ago
Damn, my waffleometre just broke…
Mike Doyle
11 months ago
Damn, my waffleometre just broke…
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago
”But he correctly predicted the truth about what Eric Hobsbawm described as the “first and last” revolution”
In that word salad of an article I tried to find what the Stalinist Commie Hobsbawm’s ‘Correct Truth’ was. (who would sit at the Milliband family dinner with the Marxist papa, and Ed looking up at both men in awe and admiration as they talked their Marxist Dialectic…)
I never did track the correct truth in the article down though, it was like looking for that one true gravel in the rotating cement mixer drum – if it is there you are not going to find it…haha Hobsbawm – I was Amazed when he died the British MSM from every side gushed about this nasty guy…. I knew then the MSM was totally pwned, haha
Anyway – no idea what the article was about – I tried to figure it, but it must be lost in the churn…..
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago
”But he correctly predicted the truth about what Eric Hobsbawm described as the “first and last” revolution”
In that word salad of an article I tried to find what the Stalinist Commie Hobsbawm’s ‘Correct Truth’ was. (who would sit at the Milliband family dinner with the Marxist papa, and Ed looking up at both men in awe and admiration as they talked their Marxist Dialectic…)
I never did track the correct truth in the article down though, it was like looking for that one true gravel in the rotating cement mixer drum – if it is there you are not going to find it…haha Hobsbawm – I was Amazed when he died the British MSM from every side gushed about this nasty guy…. I knew then the MSM was totally pwned, haha
Anyway – no idea what the article was about – I tried to figure it, but it must be lost in the churn…..
Andrew Boughton
11 months ago
“We lack of engines … to politicise human needs.” Hmm. Interesting and as always here, beautifully thought-out and expressed. But to me, the problems we face are precisely that we have over-politicised human needs since 1848. The technocracy was not the end of radical politics, simply an efficient vehicle to transport those politicised needs to the front lines. New front lines, where even extreme change is rendered peacefully, saturated with mundane corporate euphemisms, guaranteed to calm opposition. “Nothing to see here, all perfectly reasoned and reasonable.” The new ‘norms wars’ are so effective that what was considered abominable and illegal a generation ago is now revered and sacred. And that is why people are apoplectic with undirected rage. “How did we even get here?”
Last edited 11 months ago by Andrew Boughton
Andrew Boughton
11 months ago
“We lack of engines … to politicise human needs.” Hmm. Interesting and as always here, beautifully thought-out and expressed. But to me, the problems we face are precisely that we have over-politicised human needs since 1848. The technocracy was not the end of radical politics, simply an efficient vehicle to transport those politicised needs to the front lines. New front lines, where even extreme change is rendered peacefully, saturated with mundane corporate euphemisms, guaranteed to calm opposition. “Nothing to see here, all perfectly reasoned and reasonable.” The new ‘norms wars’ are so effective that what was considered abominable and illegal a generation ago is now revered and sacred. And that is why people are apoplectic with undirected rage. “How did we even get here?”
Last edited 11 months ago by Andrew Boughton
N T
11 months ago
that was a lot of shell for nothing in the middle.
N T
11 months ago
that was a lot of shell for nothing in the middle.
David Barnett
11 months ago
There is no such thing as a post-capitalist world – only transition from one sub-species of capitalism to another.
The era we are exiting is the rigged-market crony capitalism where certain big players (such as banks, big corporations and government bureaucracies) have special, underserved privileges which allow them to gather resources to themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
I would like to think we could transition to free-market capitalism. However, our rulers, hell-bent of preserving their unearned and thoroughly abused privileges, are attempting a return to feudalism.
The civil unrest this neo-feudalism project causing could easily collapse our civilisation into no-market capitalism. In no-market capitalism the majority starve while a remnant survives to rebuild individually on their own plots of land, accumulating capital by dint of their ownefforts and ingenuity. Eventually trading will resume.
Do our elites have the wisdom to abandon neo-feudalism and allow a peaceful decentralisation of power by unrigging the marketplace?
David Barnett
11 months ago
There is no such thing as a post-capitalist world – only transition from one sub-species of capitalism to another.
The era we are exiting is the rigged-market crony capitalism where certain big players (such as banks, big corporations and government bureaucracies) have special, underserved privileges which allow them to gather resources to themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
I would like to think we could transition to free-market capitalism. However, our rulers, hell-bent of preserving their unearned and thoroughly abused privileges, are attempting a return to feudalism.
The civil unrest this neo-feudalism project causing could easily collapse our civilisation into no-market capitalism. In no-market capitalism the majority starve while a remnant survives to rebuild individually on their own plots of land, accumulating capital by dint of their ownefforts and ingenuity. Eventually trading will resume.
Do our elites have the wisdom to abandon neo-feudalism and allow a peaceful decentralisation of power by unrigging the marketplace?
Nicky Samengo-Turner
11 months ago
in 1848 Britain ruled the globe, the country was owned and run by people with talent and a sense of duty, huge self made social mobility saw the post industrial revolution entrepreneurs join the ruling classes, … and most importantly the equivalent of Shapps, Raab, and 98% of the current Tory MPs were clerks or servants, and there they and their ilk should have remained.
Nicky Samengo-Turner
11 months ago
in 1848 Britain ruled the globe, the country was owned and run by people with talent and a sense of duty, huge self made social mobility saw the post industrial revolution entrepreneurs join the ruling classes, … and most importantly the equivalent of Shapps, Raab, and 98% of the current Tory MPs were clerks or servants, and there they and their ilk should have remained.
Alan Hawkes
11 months ago
“The formal institutions of democracy are still there, but are “divested of popular energies and innovation”. Well, what’s the point of the formal institutions, if they can’t even repair potholes properly?
Alan Hawkes
11 months ago
“The formal institutions of democracy are still there, but are “divested of popular energies and innovation”. Well, what’s the point of the formal institutions, if they can’t even repair potholes properly?
Benjamin Greco
11 months ago
What’s next? China. A totalitarian, surveillance state. It was said in the eighties that globalization would make China more like the West and democracy would flourish there. The opposite is happening the West will become like China and democracy will end. This is inevitable because it is the only way the elites will be able to keep their power. In the end the masses will welcome it because it will end the turmoil that everyone is sick off, and that is only going to get worse, and promise stability.
Benjamin Greco
11 months ago
What’s next? China. A totalitarian, surveillance state. It was said in the eighties that globalization would make China more like the West and democracy would flourish there. The opposite is happening the West will become like China and democracy will end. This is inevitable because it is the only way the elites will be able to keep their power. In the end the masses will welcome it because it will end the turmoil that everyone is sick off, and that is only going to get worse, and promise stability.
Chuck Pezeshki
11 months ago
One of the biggest mental model problems we have is we have no agreed upon, or coherent model of how societies evolve or devolve, relative to the information available to them. We are stuck believing, somehow, all this is arbitrary and just raining down on top of our heads.
Of course, just because we can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening, or that it is arbitrary. It’s not. Here are some hopefully helpful ideas on how postmodernism has helped create this desolate landscape in the context of abandoning human development in the face of increased pressures for individual atomization. https://empathy.guru/2021/08/08/information-fractalization-and-the-consequences-to-society/
Chuck Pezeshki
11 months ago
One of the biggest mental model problems we have is we have no agreed upon, or coherent model of how societies evolve or devolve, relative to the information available to them. We are stuck believing, somehow, all this is arbitrary and just raining down on top of our heads.
Of course, just because we can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening, or that it is arbitrary. It’s not. Here are some hopefully helpful ideas on how postmodernism has helped create this desolate landscape in the context of abandoning human development in the face of increased pressures for individual atomization. https://empathy.guru/2021/08/08/information-fractalization-and-the-consequences-to-society/
Michael McElwee
11 months ago
“To sail is necessary, to live is not.”
LCarey Rowland
11 months ago
Thanks for your analysis. In my improvised readings of history, I have developed a curiosity of that 1848 revolution, or whatever it was.
So your analysis rings true. As for your comparison to our present era, we shall see. Yet, whatever we do see developing in megatrends and micro-orgainizstions, in riots and peace . . . in the ubiquitous dominance in this still-new, as-yet-not-fully-examined social media drug-dependency, we are at a moment in history where absolutely nothing will surprise me.
But whatever happens, I have this vague wariness, this ill-defined sense that it will be destructive, as if there is most likely a period of tearing down institutions before any serious rebuilding of new ones can begin.
I do know this: as a former Republican in the USA, I cannot support either party now. I suppose I am a citizen of a brave new world, because some courage will be required to venture out/into any political or institutional development that purports to restore normalcy, especially since the normalcy we had before was not worth preserving.
And I do know this: your Euro 1848 seems like a better arrangement than our American 1865.
Jonathan Saxton
10 months ago
I just came across this essay, so, sorry for the late comment. What I want to contribute is that I think this analysis is right insofar as it applies to the traditional middle and working class (MC/WC) in the US. But I think it does not apply to the college-educated elite. In fact, I believe what’s happened is that this elite has progressively disenfranchised the MC/WC while arrogating to itself, and elaborating upon, the organizations and institutions of the “thick” civil society that guarantee access, agency, and privilege.
This has brought us to this moment where the MC/WC is disempowered and largely disaffected from “gov-ment,” as Reagan used to call it.
Hendrik Mentz
11 months ago
Zeitgeist. Thrilling post. Helped me understand and connect what is in the blood with mind. Apropos, I recommend Maryann’s interview of David Hughes (link below) who argues that because the previous paradigm of rule rooted in a liberal international order and the fiat-based financial system is no longer fit for purpose from a ruling class perspective (i.e. the top 10% globally with 76% of the wealth) the technocratic class (governments, academia, MSM and big tech) – far from ‘crumbling’ (as the subtitle suggests) – is in fact conducted a ferocious psychological operation akin to a military operation aimed at locking down society. If so ‘what’s next?’ (quoting the essay) is a fait accompli unless. as the headline suggests there is a revolution, which Hughes predicts might be set off in France. 1848 vs 1984, perhaps? | video (link): Willing to Kill–Prof David Hughes on psychological warfare, class war, and establishment corruption
Hendrik Mentz
11 months ago
Zeitgeist. Thrilling post. Helped me understand and connect what is in the blood with mind. Apropos, I recommend Maryann’s interview of David Hughes (link below) who argues that because the previous paradigm of rule rooted in a liberal international order and the fiat-based financial system is no longer fit for purpose from a ruling class perspective (i.e. the top 10% globally with 76% of the wealth) the technocratic class (governments, academia, MSM and big tech) – far from ‘crumbling’ (as the subtitle suggests) – is in fact conducted a ferocious psychological operation akin to a military operation aimed at locking down society. If so ‘what’s next?’ (quoting the essay) is a fait accompli unless. as the headline suggests there is a revolution, which Hughes predicts might be set off in France. 1848 vs 1984, perhaps? | video (link): Willing to Kill–Prof David Hughes on psychological warfare, class war, and establishment corruption
I am not so sure protesters lack the ability to maintain cohesion. The new farmers party in the Netherlands would apparently win the most seats if an election were held today. Trump seized control of the Republican Party essentially as a protest vote. Robert Kennedy Junior could possibly shake up the Democrats the same way – his message is literally the same as Trumps – just put more eloquently. The Canadian opposition leader’s theme is Freedom and he is attracting disaffected people – particularly young people – from across the political landscape. As the author notes – even when movements fail they can make change. I think the Canadian convoy protesters rattled the Laurentian elite badly. With clever leadership it could have shut the country down (for instance with rolling blockades of border crossings) and there were literally not enough police in the country to stop them. I doubt anyone is going to test the patience of that much of the population quite so aggressively any time soon. If they do I also think the civil disobedience will start much sooner and be even more aggressive.
Speaking of the Truckers lost in Trudeau land…..
haha… in Canada now days – if you are one of the long term Vax injured – they are one of the only nations in the world with a 100% effective medical solution to your problems. Medical Assisted Suicide. And even pay for it, which is good as the Bio-Pharma Industrial Complex will not, haha..
I was with you until the medical assisted suicide; a dignified end at the moment one wishes to go – with due safeguarding, nuance and legal framework in place – is nothing but humanitarian to me. And I’d happily pay for that freedom and choice too.
Really? See my blog on the new death culture:
https://ayenaw.com/2023/05/09/the-new-death-culture/
I think your warning is apt and the great Mary Harrington would I believe agree with you.
So what, if whoever agrees with whoever? We can form our own opinions, regardless of endorsement.
What Mary Harrington and others do is supply their own intelligent opinions which can be useful in apprehending the zeitgeist. This article is also very commendable for that reason.
The death culture is for real and Mary has contributed a lot of original thought to the subject. The implications are not pretty and speak to fundamental issues contributing to the 1848 scenario, although I was not commenting on what I agree is an excellent article.
Neither was i commenting on the article itself, rather that adding an endorsement to an opinion doesn’t make it any more valid, or invalid.
Neither was i commenting on the article itself, rather that adding an endorsement to an opinion doesn’t make it any more valid, or invalid.
The death culture is for real and Mary has contributed a lot of original thought to the subject. The implications are not pretty and speak to fundamental issues contributing to the 1848 scenario, although I was not commenting on what I agree is an excellent article.
So what, if whoever agrees with whoever? We can form our own opinions, regardless of endorsement.
What Mary Harrington and others do is supply their own intelligent opinions which can be useful in apprehending the zeitgeist. This article is also very commendable for that reason.
Interesting. Incrementalism is how they work.
If even young children can’t survive on their own, and be subject to abortion, it will be interesting to see how far the abortion lobby will push to extend the acceptable age for abortion, perhaps up to the age of consent…. then determined by pedophiles? That would be an interesting debate to witness.
I think your warning is apt and the great Mary Harrington would I believe agree with you.
Interesting. Incrementalism is how they work.
If even young children can’t survive on their own, and be subject to abortion, it will be interesting to see how far the abortion lobby will push to extend the acceptable age for abortion, perhaps up to the age of consent…. then determined by pedophiles? That would be an interesting debate to witness.
So the wish alone is sufficient? Financial struggles or a season of personal malaise should be considered cause enough for state-assisted self-execution?
I think you have a valid case according to this wording: “due safeguarding, nuance, and legal framework in place”. Within those details however, there’s a lot of devil and some important distinctions to be made. For example: Is the deathwish of a moment good enough for a state-hastened funeral?
But no social program like that ever maintains the promised or assumed “safeguarding, nuance and legal framework.”
As Eric Hoffer wrote almost 60 years ago,
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
Really? See my blog on the new death culture:
https://ayenaw.com/2023/05/09/the-new-death-culture/
So the wish alone is sufficient? Financial struggles or a season of personal malaise should be considered cause enough for state-assisted self-execution?
I think you have a valid case according to this wording: “due safeguarding, nuance, and legal framework in place”. Within those details however, there’s a lot of devil and some important distinctions to be made. For example: Is the deathwish of a moment good enough for a state-hastened funeral?
But no social program like that ever maintains the promised or assumed “safeguarding, nuance and legal framework.”
As Eric Hoffer wrote almost 60 years ago,
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
I’ve seen those mainly US vacc prop sites. Thet take any death of a young person, anywhere in the world, and add it to their crazed list. I know of a young person who committed suicide by walking into the sea, yet they have the poor person listed on their site as a vac casualty. Sums them up for me.
Can you please provide reliable-source data about long-term injury caused by covid vaccines? For extra credit: Give death and severe health outcome data for those who were vaccinated vs. those who were not.
The data is overwhelming but I’ll leave it to others to show you the way as I don’t have the time.
The question really is…. if he did provide definitive source data, would you change your mind? Likely answer: no way.
Yes. I think I would. If. But where is the data that would make such a transformation possible for me? I will allow that such data might exist or emerge, instead of answering my own little rhetorical question myself, as you have done.
Yes. I think I would. If. But where is the data that would make such a transformation possible for me? I will allow that such data might exist or emerge, instead of answering my own little rhetorical question myself, as you have done.
The data is overwhelming but I’ll leave it to others to show you the way as I don’t have the time.
The question really is…. if he did provide definitive source data, would you change your mind? Likely answer: no way.
Makes me think that medically assisted suicidal should be marketed as the vaccine that cures the disease of living. As you saw 100% effective.
Don’t say Trudeau didn’t have any solid policy achievements – he legalized cannabis, mentally ill kids and prison inmates can now legally kill themselves, you can carry around hard drugs in BC (finally!), we have a new coat of arms with a snowflake on top, and ummm … give me sec …. we gave 6 tanks to Ukraine and ummm – oh yeah a carbon tax on everything and ummm – ummm – there are lots more that I can’t think of right now but he’s been awesome
I was with you until the medical assisted suicide; a dignified end at the moment one wishes to go – with due safeguarding, nuance and legal framework in place – is nothing but humanitarian to me. And I’d happily pay for that freedom and choice too.
I’ve seen those mainly US vacc prop sites. Thet take any death of a young person, anywhere in the world, and add it to their crazed list. I know of a young person who committed suicide by walking into the sea, yet they have the poor person listed on their site as a vac casualty. Sums them up for me.
Can you please provide reliable-source data about long-term injury caused by covid vaccines? For extra credit: Give death and severe health outcome data for those who were vaccinated vs. those who were not.
Makes me think that medically assisted suicidal should be marketed as the vaccine that cures the disease of living. As you saw 100% effective.
Don’t say Trudeau didn’t have any solid policy achievements – he legalized cannabis, mentally ill kids and prison inmates can now legally kill themselves, you can carry around hard drugs in BC (finally!), we have a new coat of arms with a snowflake on top, and ummm … give me sec …. we gave 6 tanks to Ukraine and ummm – oh yeah a carbon tax on everything and ummm – ummm – there are lots more that I can’t think of right now but he’s been awesome
Speaking of the Truckers lost in Trudeau land…..
haha… in Canada now days – if you are one of the long term Vax injured – they are one of the only nations in the world with a 100% effective medical solution to your problems. Medical Assisted Suicide. And even pay for it, which is good as the Bio-Pharma Industrial Complex will not, haha..
I am not so sure protesters lack the ability to maintain cohesion. The new farmers party in the Netherlands would apparently win the most seats if an election were held today. Trump seized control of the Republican Party essentially as a protest vote. Robert Kennedy Junior could possibly shake up the Democrats the same way – his message is literally the same as Trumps – just put more eloquently. The Canadian opposition leader’s theme is Freedom and he is attracting disaffected people – particularly young people – from across the political landscape. As the author notes – even when movements fail they can make change. I think the Canadian convoy protesters rattled the Laurentian elite badly. With clever leadership it could have shut the country down (for instance with rolling blockades of border crossings) and there were literally not enough police in the country to stop them. I doubt anyone is going to test the patience of that much of the population quite so aggressively any time soon. If they do I also think the civil disobedience will start much sooner and be even more aggressive.
Interesting. I think many would agree with what I take to be the main points:
1/ Something has gone very wrong with politics in the West and especially the English speaking countries in the last two decades. The polls suggesting that an ever increasing portion of Gen Z is losing faith in democracy are only one indication.
2/ We are heading towards an inflexion point or crisis. Maybe like 1848 as the author highlights. Maybe more like the 1960s. Hopefully not like 1789. It appears Turchin was right.
3/ No one knows what will emerge after the crisis. Perhaps merely a shift in values but with little change to institutions as in the 1960s/70s. Perhaps something more traumatic and authoritarian.
If one considers the status quo unsustainable then I would prefer less commentary bewailing the passing of the golden age of prosperity and liberty and more on what changes can be expected, feared or desired. For traditional conservatives, it may be necessary to recognise that for much to remain the same, it is necessary for much to change (to misquote an Italian). For those with a more Whiggish or technocratic sensibility, it is undeniable that there needs to be more fresh thinking and debate about how we adapt and reform. De Tocqueville was right to say that is hard to know where we will end up but a good start is to work out where we want to go.
Thanks for these nuanced and cogent remarks.
Neil Howe’s The 4th turning is here is out in august and should be worth a read. My reading of the runes – a major push for globalisation (which will fail), introduction of digital ID and CBDCs, carbon taxation/credits, agricultural concentrstion and industrialistion (vertical farrming, gmo, etc), urban intensification (smaller units, air development to concentrate human footprint), censorship on “hot button” topics, renegotition of state liabilities old vs young which will kick in sooner than people think, move to stateism – command and control economy with govt directing credit in a credit-scarce world (the boomers and their money in the markets until recently but now that’s tucked up safely to give them safer returns). At wirst I’m expecting govt default taking down much of the system incuding pensions, cbdcs as the solution to all our problems, and the introduction of UBi to compensate you for your losses provided via MMT. What could possibly go wrong? I probably just need to get out more
I agree with many of your points about the current direction of travel. The logical end point of these trends is a number of large states which are far more intrusive – in terms of the supply of credit, censorship, surveillance, etc, etc – than we are accustomed to. USA, EU, China and India being perhaps the four most important examples (with minor powers like the UK ending up as satellites, impoverished Ruritanias or roadkill).
There are, of course, lots of scenarios which could derail this outlook but the issue which intrigues me most – and I feel is insufficiently debated – is “what to do?”. If the original article was a diagnosis and your response a prognosis, we also need a prescription.
Should we accept our collective fate with resignation or are there ways to design and shape a (probably inevitable) stronger intrusive state so as to salvage as much liberty and liberalism as possible?
I agree with many of your points about the current direction of travel. The logical end point of these trends is a number of large states which are far more intrusive – in terms of the supply of credit, censorship, surveillance, etc, etc – than we are accustomed to. USA, EU, China and India being perhaps the four most important examples (with minor powers like the UK ending up as satellites, impoverished Ruritanias or roadkill).
There are, of course, lots of scenarios which could derail this outlook but the issue which intrigues me most – and I feel is insufficiently debated – is “what to do?”. If the original article was a diagnosis and your response a prognosis, we also need a prescription.
Should we accept our collective fate with resignation or are there ways to design and shape a (probably inevitable) stronger intrusive state so as to salvage as much liberty and liberalism as possible?
Thanks for these nuanced and cogent remarks.
Neil Howe’s The 4th turning is here is out in august and should be worth a read. My reading of the runes – a major push for globalisation (which will fail), introduction of digital ID and CBDCs, carbon taxation/credits, agricultural concentrstion and industrialistion (vertical farrming, gmo, etc), urban intensification (smaller units, air development to concentrate human footprint), censorship on “hot button” topics, renegotition of state liabilities old vs young which will kick in sooner than people think, move to stateism – command and control economy with govt directing credit in a credit-scarce world (the boomers and their money in the markets until recently but now that’s tucked up safely to give them safer returns). At wirst I’m expecting govt default taking down much of the system incuding pensions, cbdcs as the solution to all our problems, and the introduction of UBi to compensate you for your losses provided via MMT. What could possibly go wrong? I probably just need to get out more
Interesting. I think many would agree with what I take to be the main points:
1/ Something has gone very wrong with politics in the West and especially the English speaking countries in the last two decades. The polls suggesting that an ever increasing portion of Gen Z is losing faith in democracy are only one indication.
2/ We are heading towards an inflexion point or crisis. Maybe like 1848 as the author highlights. Maybe more like the 1960s. Hopefully not like 1789. It appears Turchin was right.
3/ No one knows what will emerge after the crisis. Perhaps merely a shift in values but with little change to institutions as in the 1960s/70s. Perhaps something more traumatic and authoritarian.
If one considers the status quo unsustainable then I would prefer less commentary bewailing the passing of the golden age of prosperity and liberty and more on what changes can be expected, feared or desired. For traditional conservatives, it may be necessary to recognise that for much to remain the same, it is necessary for much to change (to misquote an Italian). For those with a more Whiggish or technocratic sensibility, it is undeniable that there needs to be more fresh thinking and debate about how we adapt and reform. De Tocqueville was right to say that is hard to know where we will end up but a good start is to work out where we want to go.
One thing I really like about Unherd is its commitment to platforming diverse viewpoints.
I completely disagree with the premise of this article. I abhor the Jacobin and Marxist idea that the Ends Justify the Means. I don’t want to live in a world where people think its OK to act out violently, subvert or distort the Truth in a Machavelian/Utilitarian way to achieve an End Goal. Just because the other guy does it doesn’t make it right.
But I do think there’s value to Non-Compliance in the face of Regimes that suppress opposing viewpoints. And that’s really the entire issue in our world. We can’t debate. We have the appearance of debate but its rarely if ever done in good faith with two participants interested in understanding the folly of their own worldview.
The best ideas are not winning. You can’t have Democracy when a Universal Ideology is imposed and all political dissent is labeled conspiracy or misinformation by a Press that operates like State Media.
One thing I really like about Unherd is its commitment to platforming diverse viewpoints.
I completely disagree with the premise of this article. I abhor the Jacobin and Marxist idea that the Ends Justify the Means. I don’t want to live in a world where people think its OK to act out violently, subvert or distort the Truth in a Machavelian/Utilitarian way to achieve an End Goal. Just because the other guy does it doesn’t make it right.
But I do think there’s value to Non-Compliance in the face of Regimes that suppress opposing viewpoints. And that’s really the entire issue in our world. We can’t debate. We have the appearance of debate but its rarely if ever done in good faith with two participants interested in understanding the folly of their own worldview.
The best ideas are not winning. You can’t have Democracy when a Universal Ideology is imposed and all political dissent is labeled conspiracy or misinformation by a Press that operates like State Media.
Damn, my waffleometre just broke…
Damn, my waffleometre just broke…
”But he correctly predicted the truth about what Eric Hobsbawm described as the “first and last” revolution”
In that word salad of an article I tried to find what the Stalinist Commie Hobsbawm’s ‘Correct Truth’ was. (who would sit at the Milliband family dinner with the Marxist papa, and Ed looking up at both men in awe and admiration as they talked their Marxist Dialectic…)
I never did track the correct truth in the article down though, it was like looking for that one true gravel in the rotating cement mixer drum – if it is there you are not going to find it…haha Hobsbawm – I was Amazed when he died the British MSM from every side gushed about this nasty guy…. I knew then the MSM was totally pwned, haha
Anyway – no idea what the article was about – I tried to figure it, but it must be lost in the churn…..
”But he correctly predicted the truth about what Eric Hobsbawm described as the “first and last” revolution”
In that word salad of an article I tried to find what the Stalinist Commie Hobsbawm’s ‘Correct Truth’ was. (who would sit at the Milliband family dinner with the Marxist papa, and Ed looking up at both men in awe and admiration as they talked their Marxist Dialectic…)
I never did track the correct truth in the article down though, it was like looking for that one true gravel in the rotating cement mixer drum – if it is there you are not going to find it…haha Hobsbawm – I was Amazed when he died the British MSM from every side gushed about this nasty guy…. I knew then the MSM was totally pwned, haha
Anyway – no idea what the article was about – I tried to figure it, but it must be lost in the churn…..
“We lack of engines … to politicise human needs.” Hmm. Interesting and as always here, beautifully thought-out and expressed. But to me, the problems we face are precisely that we have over-politicised human needs since 1848. The technocracy was not the end of radical politics, simply an efficient vehicle to transport those politicised needs to the front lines. New front lines, where even extreme change is rendered peacefully, saturated with mundane corporate euphemisms, guaranteed to calm opposition. “Nothing to see here, all perfectly reasoned and reasonable.” The new ‘norms wars’ are so effective that what was considered abominable and illegal a generation ago is now revered and sacred. And that is why people are apoplectic with undirected rage. “How did we even get here?”
“We lack of engines … to politicise human needs.” Hmm. Interesting and as always here, beautifully thought-out and expressed. But to me, the problems we face are precisely that we have over-politicised human needs since 1848. The technocracy was not the end of radical politics, simply an efficient vehicle to transport those politicised needs to the front lines. New front lines, where even extreme change is rendered peacefully, saturated with mundane corporate euphemisms, guaranteed to calm opposition. “Nothing to see here, all perfectly reasoned and reasonable.” The new ‘norms wars’ are so effective that what was considered abominable and illegal a generation ago is now revered and sacred. And that is why people are apoplectic with undirected rage. “How did we even get here?”
that was a lot of shell for nothing in the middle.
that was a lot of shell for nothing in the middle.
There is no such thing as a post-capitalist world – only transition from one sub-species of capitalism to another.
The era we are exiting is the rigged-market crony capitalism where certain big players (such as banks, big corporations and government bureaucracies) have special, underserved privileges which allow them to gather resources to themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
I would like to think we could transition to free-market capitalism. However, our rulers, hell-bent of preserving their unearned and thoroughly abused privileges, are attempting a return to feudalism.
The civil unrest this neo-feudalism project causing could easily collapse our civilisation into no-market capitalism. In no-market capitalism the majority starve while a remnant survives to rebuild individually on their own plots of land, accumulating capital by dint of their ownefforts and ingenuity. Eventually trading will resume.
Do our elites have the wisdom to abandon neo-feudalism and allow a peaceful decentralisation of power by unrigging the marketplace?
There is no such thing as a post-capitalist world – only transition from one sub-species of capitalism to another.
The era we are exiting is the rigged-market crony capitalism where certain big players (such as banks, big corporations and government bureaucracies) have special, underserved privileges which allow them to gather resources to themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
I would like to think we could transition to free-market capitalism. However, our rulers, hell-bent of preserving their unearned and thoroughly abused privileges, are attempting a return to feudalism.
The civil unrest this neo-feudalism project causing could easily collapse our civilisation into no-market capitalism. In no-market capitalism the majority starve while a remnant survives to rebuild individually on their own plots of land, accumulating capital by dint of their ownefforts and ingenuity. Eventually trading will resume.
Do our elites have the wisdom to abandon neo-feudalism and allow a peaceful decentralisation of power by unrigging the marketplace?
in 1848 Britain ruled the globe, the country was owned and run by people with talent and a sense of duty, huge self made social mobility saw the post industrial revolution entrepreneurs join the ruling classes, … and most importantly the equivalent of Shapps, Raab, and 98% of the current Tory MPs were clerks or servants, and there they and their ilk should have remained.
in 1848 Britain ruled the globe, the country was owned and run by people with talent and a sense of duty, huge self made social mobility saw the post industrial revolution entrepreneurs join the ruling classes, … and most importantly the equivalent of Shapps, Raab, and 98% of the current Tory MPs were clerks or servants, and there they and their ilk should have remained.
“The formal institutions of democracy are still there, but are “divested of popular energies and innovation”. Well, what’s the point of the formal institutions, if they can’t even repair potholes properly?
“The formal institutions of democracy are still there, but are “divested of popular energies and innovation”. Well, what’s the point of the formal institutions, if they can’t even repair potholes properly?
What’s next? China. A totalitarian, surveillance state. It was said in the eighties that globalization would make China more like the West and democracy would flourish there. The opposite is happening the West will become like China and democracy will end. This is inevitable because it is the only way the elites will be able to keep their power. In the end the masses will welcome it because it will end the turmoil that everyone is sick off, and that is only going to get worse, and promise stability.
What’s next? China. A totalitarian, surveillance state. It was said in the eighties that globalization would make China more like the West and democracy would flourish there. The opposite is happening the West will become like China and democracy will end. This is inevitable because it is the only way the elites will be able to keep their power. In the end the masses will welcome it because it will end the turmoil that everyone is sick off, and that is only going to get worse, and promise stability.
One of the biggest mental model problems we have is we have no agreed upon, or coherent model of how societies evolve or devolve, relative to the information available to them. We are stuck believing, somehow, all this is arbitrary and just raining down on top of our heads.
Of course, just because we can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening, or that it is arbitrary. It’s not. Here are some hopefully helpful ideas on how postmodernism has helped create this desolate landscape in the context of abandoning human development in the face of increased pressures for individual atomization. https://empathy.guru/2021/08/08/information-fractalization-and-the-consequences-to-society/
One of the biggest mental model problems we have is we have no agreed upon, or coherent model of how societies evolve or devolve, relative to the information available to them. We are stuck believing, somehow, all this is arbitrary and just raining down on top of our heads.
Of course, just because we can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening, or that it is arbitrary. It’s not. Here are some hopefully helpful ideas on how postmodernism has helped create this desolate landscape in the context of abandoning human development in the face of increased pressures for individual atomization. https://empathy.guru/2021/08/08/information-fractalization-and-the-consequences-to-society/
“To sail is necessary, to live is not.”
Thanks for your analysis. In my improvised readings of history, I have developed a curiosity of that 1848 revolution, or whatever it was.
So your analysis rings true. As for your comparison to our present era, we shall see. Yet, whatever we do see developing in megatrends and micro-orgainizstions, in riots and peace . . . in the ubiquitous dominance in this still-new, as-yet-not-fully-examined social media drug-dependency, we are at a moment in history where absolutely nothing will surprise me.
But whatever happens, I have this vague wariness, this ill-defined sense that it will be destructive, as if there is most likely a period of tearing down institutions before any serious rebuilding of new ones can begin.
I do know this: as a former Republican in the USA, I cannot support either party now. I suppose I am a citizen of a brave new world, because some courage will be required to venture out/into any political or institutional development that purports to restore normalcy, especially since the normalcy we had before was not worth preserving.
And I do know this: your Euro 1848 seems like a better arrangement than our American 1865.
I just came across this essay, so, sorry for the late comment. What I want to contribute is that I think this analysis is right insofar as it applies to the traditional middle and working class (MC/WC) in the US. But I think it does not apply to the college-educated elite. In fact, I believe what’s happened is that this elite has progressively disenfranchised the MC/WC while arrogating to itself, and elaborating upon, the organizations and institutions of the “thick” civil society that guarantee access, agency, and privilege.
This has brought us to this moment where the MC/WC is disempowered and largely disaffected from “gov-ment,” as Reagan used to call it.
Zeitgeist. Thrilling post. Helped me understand and connect what is in the blood with mind. Apropos, I recommend Maryann’s interview of David Hughes (link below) who argues that because the previous paradigm of rule rooted in a liberal international order and the fiat-based financial system is no longer fit for purpose from a ruling class perspective (i.e. the top 10% globally with 76% of the wealth) the technocratic class (governments, academia, MSM and big tech) – far from ‘crumbling’ (as the subtitle suggests) – is in fact conducted a ferocious psychological operation akin to a military operation aimed at locking down society. If so ‘what’s next?’ (quoting the essay) is a fait accompli unless. as the headline suggests there is a revolution, which Hughes predicts might be set off in France. 1848 vs 1984, perhaps? | video (link): Willing to Kill–Prof David Hughes on psychological warfare, class war, and establishment corruption
Zeitgeist. Thrilling post. Helped me understand and connect what is in the blood with mind. Apropos, I recommend Maryann’s interview of David Hughes (link below) who argues that because the previous paradigm of rule rooted in a liberal international order and the fiat-based financial system is no longer fit for purpose from a ruling class perspective (i.e. the top 10% globally with 76% of the wealth) the technocratic class (governments, academia, MSM and big tech) – far from ‘crumbling’ (as the subtitle suggests) – is in fact conducted a ferocious psychological operation akin to a military operation aimed at locking down society. If so ‘what’s next?’ (quoting the essay) is a fait accompli unless. as the headline suggests there is a revolution, which Hughes predicts might be set off in France. 1848 vs 1984, perhaps? | video (link): Willing to Kill–Prof David Hughes on psychological warfare, class war, and establishment corruption