💾 Archived View for josias.dev › gemlog › everything-is-rotten.gmi captured on 2023-07-10 at 13:49:25. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2023-01-29)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Note: this has been delisted. I think the argument is incomplete and represents the concept poorly. The page itself will remain online to ensure links continue to work.
An insurrectionary objection to reformism.
My friend Jeremy recently wrote an article explaining Chesterton's fence. I will use the same quote as he did to describe the idea. I recommend you read his article before continuing, though my thesis is not directly related to it.
Jeremy Potter - Chesterton's Fence
There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.” — G.K. Chesterton, “The Thing”
The personal implications of this are insightful. Often there are parts of my life that I start to dismantle without understanding the purpose of it. This leads me to despair at points, since I realize that there is really nothing founding the majority of what holds my own identity together. This tempts me to "come up with a solution to all these problems in [my] head", as Jeremy says. This leads me into a depressing epistemic nihilism.
Jeremy moves on to describe the political implications of this idea, which more closely relates to his explanation of Chesterton's intent:
Yet the apostles knew that any attempt to do this would inevitably fail, because true progress develops organically, through time, hard work, setbacks, failures, and the grace of God, not through a radical break from the past. And indeed, out of all the revolutionary anarchist institutions established during the Spanish Civil War period, only one of them survives to have any influence — the one established by a Roman Catholic priest who never wrote any books or participated in any revolutionary movements, but simply wished to love his neighbor and uplift the oppressed.
I believe everything is rotten. Our institutions are designed to serve those already in power, states cannot respond properly to any social issues, corporations are empowered to destroy the environment for profit, and so much more. This is not the place to go into the details.
And if I have to tell you that what's real is terrible / Maybe you're in the wrong place — Pat the Bunny, "Run from What's Comfortable"
Worse than all of this is the fact that people do not seem to be doing anything significant. Society is slowly waking up to some of these issues, including climate change, but most people do not seem to want to address the root of the problem. Different groups have solutions to this.
Reformism and vanguardism both depend on the idea of the masses being inherently unconscious. According to these ideologies, the people are sleeping, and either must slowly be led along as we reshape society under their noses (shifting the Overton window slowly and making the new seem acceptable), or the masses must be mobilized by a leader who uses them to implement a radical shift in society.
Take social democracy and Bolshevism for example: they clearly both came from the supposition that the masses do not have any revolutionary consciousness, so need to be led. Social democrats and Bolsheviks differed only in the methods used—reformist party or revolutionary party, parliamentary strategy or violent conquest of power—in the identical programme of bringing consciousness to the exploited from outside. — At Daggers Drawn with the Existence, its Defenders and its False Critics
Social democrats say that society cannot be changed radically, fighting against "extremists" with the same vehemence as those who push for less incrementalist societal shifts. Bolshevists say society must be changed radically, but the people will not be ready without actively pushing for class consciousness.
It is easy to imagine our society as simply something that is broken and in need of fixing. In that context, it makes sense to consider a variety of solutions. If society is not inherently evil, but rather misguided, there is no urgency. It is tempting to view society this way, since it provides some relief to ubiquitous chaos.
When settlers (like myself) talk about reorganizing society, it often involves reshaping colonialism to make it more pleasant for colonizers and unintentionally involves reestablishing colonial power. This is the problem with many discussions of decentralizing power. We have to consider whether we are simply considering decentralizing power over stolen land.
As I heard from a wise indigenous anarchist, abolishing capitalism will probably increase our standard of living, but abolishing colonialism will likely lower it. This is because our lives have been built upon institutions that depend on genocide. Dismantling those institutions entirely, rather than reforming them, will be painful for those dependent on them.
Colonialism is not something we can end by reorganizing society. Dominant institutions and their ecocidal practices must be eradicated.
This is not a rebuttal to Jeremy's post. I agree with almost everything he says in it. Nor is this a comprehensive evaluation of the issue. If I did that, I would prove myself ignorant of the very idea he expressed (and this post would never end). Instead, I would like to present some more ideas to consider. I want to help future society's bud develop into a beautiful flower.
I recommend reading the linked resources if you would like to consider these ideas further.
~ Josias, 2022-10-04 (CC-BY-SA 4.0)
Resources:
At Daggers Drawn with the Existence, its Defenders and its false critics
Decolonization is not a Metaphor
Ammendum: I am amazed at aimless alliteration, actually.