We like to think of "the left" as the enemy. But the left is not the real problem. They are more symptom, than cause. The real problem is the fact of the state and the reasons why it exists.
The key is to see that the system itself, the idea of rational technocratic administration, is itself “left wing” in its fundamental organization. If you say, “we need better policies,” this is a technocratic response. It is fundamentally “left wing” in orientation. There are no (or very few) conservatives in America or the west in general. The administrative state is not a corruption of the Constitution and the ideas upon which it is founded. The very idea of a written constitution is a rationalist approach to setting up a governmental system. It’s like hiring consultants to give you a new set of policies. The bind that “conservatives” are in is that they are placed in the position of holding a “revolutionary” view. We need to sweep away the whole system and burn it to the ground, the whole of modernity, and let what emerges emerge. To me this is an untenable position. So this is why I am an advocate of building a parallel community.
This piece makes me think that conservatives can never actually win. They, too, are part of the administrative state or system but also play with inferior rules. The state, when administered by the left, uses tax revenues and either hires the revolutionaries or funds their NGOs. Conservatives, when controlling the state, supposedly attempt to reduce the size of government and are ultimately philosophically opposed to patronage jobs (I say philosophically because they do fund police and security-type functions). They both inherently support the state and contribute to its continual growth, albeit at different rates.
The left aims to grow the state, and the right merely hopes to slow it down.
I've personally watched as local parks and government has taken over programs run by either non-profits or small business. If you can get consistent revenue through taxes, you don’t need to worry about fundraising or paying customers. As a government entity, you always outlast your competitors during a downturn or crisis because you can get cheap bonds or loans backed by your agency.
"the administrative state seems more benign than the figure of the dictator, regardless of the reality."
This is true, even where there is a central figure to aim hatred at, such as POTUS, the lie is revealed when a doddering and incompetent figurehead is installed and no change occurs. The overarching state continues to grind away and assume the functions that a coherent society provided before.
From another viewpoint: it is amazing more progressives didn't cheer the great victory in 2016 when Trump proceeded to be thwarted by the technical state at virtually every turn except for a brief "deep state doesn't exist, OK it exists and it's good actually" which seems to have moved quickly out of sight.
Much to think about, clearly influential on another well known writer but I hadn't realized how much.
Nobody wants to draw attention to the reality that the real "dictator," the real "authoritarian" is the administrative state with its totalizing impulse. They use things like "safety" and "fairness" to justify this control over all things, but control it is.
The key is to see that the system itself, the idea of rational technocratic administration, is itself “left wing” in its fundamental organization. If you say, “we need better policies,” this is a technocratic response. It is fundamentally “left wing” in orientation. There are no (or very few) conservatives in America or the west in general. The administrative state is not a corruption of the Constitution and the ideas upon which it is founded. The very idea of a written constitution is a rationalist approach to setting up a governmental system. It’s like hiring consultants to give you a new set of policies. The bind that “conservatives” are in is that they are placed in the position of holding a “revolutionary” view. We need to sweep away the whole system and burn it to the ground, the whole of modernity, and let what emerges emerge. To me this is an untenable position. So this is why I am an advocate of building a parallel community.
This piece makes me think that conservatives can never actually win. They, too, are part of the administrative state or system but also play with inferior rules. The state, when administered by the left, uses tax revenues and either hires the revolutionaries or funds their NGOs. Conservatives, when controlling the state, supposedly attempt to reduce the size of government and are ultimately philosophically opposed to patronage jobs (I say philosophically because they do fund police and security-type functions). They both inherently support the state and contribute to its continual growth, albeit at different rates.
The left aims to grow the state, and the right merely hopes to slow it down.
I've personally watched as local parks and government has taken over programs run by either non-profits or small business. If you can get consistent revenue through taxes, you don’t need to worry about fundraising or paying customers. As a government entity, you always outlast your competitors during a downturn or crisis because you can get cheap bonds or loans backed by your agency.
"the administrative state seems more benign than the figure of the dictator, regardless of the reality."
This is true, even where there is a central figure to aim hatred at, such as POTUS, the lie is revealed when a doddering and incompetent figurehead is installed and no change occurs. The overarching state continues to grind away and assume the functions that a coherent society provided before.
From another viewpoint: it is amazing more progressives didn't cheer the great victory in 2016 when Trump proceeded to be thwarted by the technical state at virtually every turn except for a brief "deep state doesn't exist, OK it exists and it's good actually" which seems to have moved quickly out of sight.
Much to think about, clearly influential on another well known writer but I hadn't realized how much.
Nobody wants to draw attention to the reality that the real "dictator," the real "authoritarian" is the administrative state with its totalizing impulse. They use things like "safety" and "fairness" to justify this control over all things, but control it is.