If you hadn’t noticed, many American institutions (law, politics, education) have become overbuilt and more corrupt than usual. Arrangements made more than two generations ago, including treaties like N.A.T.O, find themselves up for re-negotiation. The worse parts of many people (activists/extremists/third-rate true-believers) and not-the-best-people(Trump/Biden) find themselves in leadership positions by virtue of populist resurgence and/or sclerotic parasitism. Our personal and work lives, indeed our very most important thoughts/habits, are being altered by new technologies.
What to make of all this?
It’s hard to get good men, and the good in men, into positions of authority. Even then, it can be very hard to get them out of positions of authority, or for them to accept legitimate criticism of their own failures (as individuals and parts of a coalition). Such is human nature. George Washington was an exception, not the rule.
Political Philosophy: My take on the longer liberal idealist/secular humanist view, for which I have grudging respect: Although I find humanism inadequate in properly constraining the worse parts of our natures, and inadequate in properly incentivizing the better parts of our natures long-term, one could do a lot worse. Rationalism, and rationalizing every problem won’t ever replace the need for courage, sacrifice and honor. Seeing all institutions as a ‘system’ tends to be a habit of people on the Left. Often in asking about specifics of ‘the system’ one gets a melange of half-formed ideas and half-truths.
On that note, a particularly bad habit of conservatives is thinking that all institutions are always worth defending with honor, at all times. Many a conservative type has passed beyond youthful license into aged conformity, with quite a lot of hypocrisy along the way but hopefully some wisdom. Like anyone, ask their children and the people who know them their flaws. Human nature is what it is, alas, for me and you.
As we’ve seen with liberal idealism, the weaknesses here are fairly obvious (more so for outsiders): The assumption of endless ‘progress’, ‘liberty’ and an ever-growing list of ‘human rights’ eventually runs into both human nature and reality. Championing activism, and radical activism, eventually cedes the public square and to anti-speech identitarians and radical terrorists who incentivize bloody violence. In other words, much like religious movements, sects, and every church/town meeting/co-op/work meeting you’ve ever been to, I’d argue a few patterns emerge:
- Eventually the most interested end-up controlling the promotions/hiring/firing. These are not usually the most talented/mission-criticial for success. Here, you find some unstable people, some self-absorbed assholes and some righteous true-believers. But you also find some decent, no-bullshit folks, some good administrators and solid, steadfast types. Everyone is a position of authority has the potential to abuse that authority, and everyone knows something you don’t. Unless people who have skin in the game participate, authority can become rotten quickly.
- There are ALWAYS truly crazy, true-believing, ‘revealed-truth’ fanatics, as well as ‘rule-following punishers’ found within every organization. Instability and ignorance renew themselves daily. Fanatics don’t usually have much going on in life. Like crazy church types and whatever truths they might have (ecstatic, righteous, convinced), true-believers exert upward pressure upon the organization, and upon the reasonable, steadfast types. Secularizing has gone along with making space for the radical Left. The radical left is full of terrorists, fanatic soft-Marxists, anti-fascists, and ‘whatever-you’re-for-we’re-against’ types. The postmodern void has created (S)elves in a void and individuals left to find their own way through lots of failing institutions. These realities have left strident types to dictate and control language, chair administrative functions and the ‘change-pipeline’ within our institutions.
- What props up the empty lives of people living on the edge is often an institutionalized truth, which they’ve internalized. Once you universalize a truth, even reasonable-sounding, common-sense truths, they will be clung to by the emotionally and spiritually needy, the physically hungry and least among us, often followed to extremes. Universalization leads to corruption of ideas (abstracted out of context), and crises of authority. You’ve got the get the right ideas for long-term stability.
A little bit more: The ‘Saganites’ in my family tend to see their liberal idealism as the true inheritance of ‘The Enlightenment,’ and they see themselves as its inheritors (mathematicians/teachers/artists). The knowledge/truth claims are solid enough for action. PBS is a worthy vehicle to share knowledge/truth, helping everyone to Self-betterment, stronger families and communities; offering more substance than the free-market/endless marketplace. Point to a better scalable vision, they ask. Relative to home/hearth/Jesus/local tradition alone, they have a point. Relative to the radical Left and regressive movements, radical liberationists, and violent, chaotic anti-fascists…they don’t have much to say.
—
The conservative, American traditional view has also failed in important ways, not merely to outflank the radical Left, and the general shift towards liberal idealism/secular humanism. It’s also failed, like previous liberal political coalitions, to navigate through the postmodern fog of relativism; the failure of older orders. Many conservative types have drifted further right and towards the embrace of religious revival, retreated to the Catholic hierarchy, and towards the radical Left’s embrace in a mirror image (identitarian, ideological, racial etc.).
Such events are hardly surprising.
What’ll probably happen, but who knows for sure?: New coalitions of consensus and public opinion will form, seeking control of popular media/law/politics, and the highest chairs. These will be full of stifling conformity or reasonable law-following common-sense, depending on how you look at things. Many individuals, within coalitions, will pursue their aims. The center of the fulcrum will very likely be more Left and secular than before.
From my position, this means a slower-growth economy, more ‘class’ stratification, and less religious belief. It will mean more isolated ‘(S)elves’ seeking meaning through political ideas, coalitions and soft activist activity (I think this is a net loss to independent thought and the space to be neutral).
What say you?