nydwracu niþgrim, nihtbealwa mæst

I’ve been working my way through The True and Only Heaven, a history of progress by Christopher Lasch, an ex-Frankfurt School Marxist who followed the trend of breaking with the left after the 1960s, but, instead of following many of his contemporaries into neoconservatism, jumped the divide altogether and landed in a worldview that can only be described with the overused cliche “beyond left and right”. Although technically a history of the idea of progress, the book, after aligning itself against the secularization explanation of Mencius Moldbug and Alain de Benoist, jumps tracks and ends up summarizing the republicans, Orestes Brownson, and Carlyle (characterized as an Emerson-like secularized crypto-Calvinist and advocate of hero-worship as a means to something bearing at least some resemblance to palingenesis). (I’m about halfway through now, and that’s the Carlyle bit. Also, I’m only going to cover a few points in the introduction; there’s much more there. I might scan it later.) Anyway, Lasch throws out enough interesting points that I decided to collect a few. (My comments are in italics.)

1. “The history of the twentieth century suggests that totalitarian regimes are highly unstable, evolving toward some type of bureaucracy that fits neither the classic fascist nor the socialist model.” (p. 24) This certainly seems true of China, the most successful of those regimes; I am (admittedly to my detriment) neither a historian nor an international relations specialist, but the only counterexample that comes to mind is North Korea, which can be safely written off in any pattern to which it is an exception.
2. “The tradition of English Marxism, as articulated by Raymond Williams and E. P. Thompson … repudiated economic determinism and the mechanistic distinction between economic ‘base’ and cultural ‘superstructure’. It showed that class consciousness is the product of historical experience, not a simple reflection of economic interest. The work of Williams and Thomas also showed how Marxism could absorb the insights of cultural conservatives and provide a sympathetic account, not just of the economic hardships imposed by capitalism, but of the way in which capitalism thwarted the need for joy in work, stable connections, family life, a sense of place, and a sense of historical continuity.” (p. 29) I know nothing about either of them, but they’re going on my reading list.
3. The theories of inevitable historical progression through a particular set of stages came not from Christian eschatology, but, as per Hans Blumenberg, from the mistaken assumption of the necessity of competition with Christianity on its own ground. The characteristic feature of progressivism is the “moral rehabilitation of desire”: the belief that the “private vices” of “envy, pride, and ambition” become “‘public virtues’ by stimulating industry and invention”, whereas “thrift and self-denial” lead to stagnation; in other words, the finding of value in, the moral rehabilitation of, man’s “insatiable appetites”, as a driver of never-ending expansion. “The modern conception of history is utopian only in its assumption that modern history has no foreseeable conclusion,” and its denial of the belief in the life cycle of civilizations, or at least the possibility that said life cycle may apply to ours, that it may go the way of Rome and die a natural death.
4. “[I]f humanity thrives on peace and prosperity, it also needs an occasional taste of battle. Men and women need to believe that ‘life is a critical affair,’ in Richard Niebuhr’s words. They cannot be satisfied merely with the opportunity to choose their goals and ‘life-styles,’ in the current jargon; they need to believe that their choices carry serious consequences.” This drive for cosmic significance is present in Christianity and communism, and, as per Lewis Mumford, was at least partially responsible for the success of Hitler. Compare Orwell, who Lasch quotes; or Alain de Benoist’s statement that it is “better to wear the helmet of a Red Army soldier than to live on a diet of hamburgers in Brooklyn”. This is also, according to a professor who I mentioned this to, a key point in Frankfurt School analysis (a school which Lasch once followed), which can be explained along the following lines: When traveling a long distance by car, it used to be the case that one could only take back roads; but now, we have highways, which largely prevent us from getting lost, point out the attractions we might want to see along the way, and are far more convenient. To take the highway, then, is more convenient, but at the same time less human. (I can’t vouch for any of this myself, though, since I haven’t read any proper Frankfurt School yet.)
5. According to Jon Elster, the “most valuable and persuasive element in Marxism … is the way it makes ‘self-realization’ the ‘central value in society.’ But this is another way of saying that Marxism owes much of its appeal, at least in the West, to its identification with the central values of capitalism itself—which can allegedly be achieved, in their fully developed form, only after the socialist revolution.” It may be interesting for someone with more knowledge of the Marxist and liberal traditions to catalogue their similarities, or at least those existing before their cross-pollination (or, alternatively, the coöptation (yes, with the diaeresis… there really is no less wrong way to write that word!) of what remained of leftism) in the American academy.

Also, some administrivia: I have a Tumblr now, so follow if you’re into that sort of thing.

Anonymous has become nothing more than another facet of the inertia that drives already-resolved issues to completion.

From IBTimes:

The Anonymous collective has hacked into and defaced the website of an American nationalist party, claiming it had connections with Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.

Hackers attacked and took possession of the website belonging to American Third Position (A3P), a white nationalist party which allegedly has connections with neo-Nazi and extreme right-wing organisations.

…

“We call upon not only other anti-fascists but all those opposed to white supremacy to utilise this information and make hell for these white nationalist scumbags,” the statement added. “It is essential, if we wish to live in a world free from oppression, to expose and confront racists at their jobs, their schools, at their homes and in the streets.”

The Anonymous hacks are part of an ongoing campaign called Operation Blitzkrieg, which is aimed at attacking and exposing the websites of neo-Nazi organisations in Europe and the United States.

When this operation is considered in terms of memetic immunology, its flaws become obvious: a campaign against white nationalism is essentially a campaign against smallpox. One would be hard-pressed to find a school of thought more out of favor than that represented by the A3P, but Anonymous, which markets itself as opposition to the status quo, believes it to be a worthwhile target.

This is but the latest point in a long and obvious trend: read this page and try to find anything that the average Starbucks-class college student would not support. You won’t, and considering their likely membership, this is unsurprising. This is why Anonymous is irrelevant.

When I say ‘irrelevant’ here, I mean that they will not bring about any sort of meaningful change; in fact, they are a tool of the status quo. The status quo must be thought of as a direction, not merely a state, considering how predictable change has become. (Does anyone dispute at this point that, for example, gay marriage will soon be legalized, most likely by the courts?) Political action must address this change, must figure out where it stands relative to that change and act accordingly; if it limits itself to addressing the present, it may end up misdirecting its energy, addressing issues that will soon resolve themselves by pure inertia and ignoring issues for which the direction that inertia will eventually drive them in has not yet been decided.

You don’t change the direction of a car by flooring it, kids. Get off the gas and look up: the bridge is out, and you’re about at the edge of the cliff. If you won’t try the steering wheel, at least get in the back, and hand the damn thing over to someone who can actually drive.

(Note: Posts will be more infrequent than usual for a while due to college; I’m taking more classes than I perhaps should be.)