Felix Stalder via nettime-l on Sat, 20 Jul 2024 21:26:41 +0200 (CEST)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Ocular facts




On 7/15/24 15:45, David Garcia via nettime-l wrote:

Why do centrists Fail? Because centrists are usually 'technocrats' who see politics as a process of piece meal problem solving based on focus groups. They often have poor story telling skills. The very word ‘progressive’ invests hope in the future whereas the right is more inclined to deploy nostalgia. Take BACK control or Make America great AGAIN.


I think the lack of story telling skills is more a symptom than a cause. It, quite accurately, reflects the fact that the center has no story to tell anymore, ever since the "peace dividend" and the belief in "public-private partnerships" ended with Clinton/Blair/Schröder. Since then, the contradictions have mounted. (Obama is different because me could tell a different story that sidestepped some of these contradictions, but he could not resolve them in any way.)

Sociologically speaking, society needs to achieve three types of integration to function. It needs system-integration, that is, its various parts need to be form a coherent whole. Say, the educational sector must provide people with relevant skills. In the West, this system is capitalism, which obviously is much more comprehensive than the economy in a narrow sense.

Second, it needs social-integration, that is people must subscribe, to some degree, to basic values and rules of how society is organized. A voluntary submission to what Gramsci might have called "hegemonic ideas". They don't need to be realized fully in practice, but they provide orientation. In the West, these values and rules have been largely liberal democratic, with a notion of universal human rights, the rule of law and some degree of social safety as the background to a life of personal freedom and dreams (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness).

Third, it's ecological-integration, a society's capacity to have access to the material goods necessary for (re)production. For the longest time, this meant access to land and resources (Lebensraum, as the Nazis called it), but under climate change this takes on a different quality.

The centrist project has been to create a "win-win" situation for various factions of society, achieving both system- and social-integration, at the expense of ecological integration. In the process, society massively overshot the ecological boundaries of the planet, and the price of this is increasingly threatening its capacity to achieve integration in the other two fields.

Centrist politics knows all of this, but vetted to capitalism and liberal democracy, it continues to play the old game, with some changes at the edges (austerity and solar power).

The hard-right, particularly in the US, doesn't play this game anymore. The Reagan is truly dead. Of course, they are also not willing to give up on capitalism, but are ready to ditch liberal democracy. Not the formal part of voting and parliaments, but things like the rule of law (e.g. extension of presidential immunity) and most importantly, any notion of universalism.

With that, they plan to continue to exploit cheap nature, while promising to shield core-constituencies from its effects, even when the rest of the planet burns and/or drowns. And how do they do this? By building walls and deporting people ("remigration", as the neo-Nazis in Europe like to call it). Over time, one can imagine, the core-constituency will be getting smaller and smaller, to the point where they all fit onto rockets to Mars. There are plenty of "visionaries" planning for that.

What Trump, particularly in the current campaign, is managing is to build a coalition around this vision. As far as I can see, it consists of four major blocks:

1) The fossil industries (oil, gas, coal), who have a lot to lose from a different ecological-integration. They know their time is up, but are unwilling to fade into the sunset, there is too much money to be made (Think Koch brothers or Joe Manchin in the US, or the German FDP's role in pushing "e-fuels" in Europe).

2) The technology industry who hates regulation in the areas of crypto and AI, but also, in the US, ideas round taxing unrealized capital gains, which hits venture capital. They really like the speculative economy, where they can make shit up while making sure that others will hold the bag.

3) Small-town elite. Members of the local chambers of commerce, who hate not just taxes, but also globalization, and religious conservatives who reject secular modernism.

4) Disenfranchised lower-middle classes, who have seen their income stagnate or fall over the last decades, accelerated by austerity and an unjust transition (think Macron's plan to increase fuel taxes which ignited the "yellow vests" movement). To them, the promise of liberal democracy sounds hollow and universalism sounds like "affirmative action" for others.

I think, like all political coalitions, the resulting politics are contradictory and need to be so, given the contradictory nature of the base. [1]. This makes it unstable. The Uber-venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, for example, is well-known to despise small-town America. In his view, anyone who failed to move to Silicon Valley (and other islands) deserves all the misfortune they are getting. Worker populism and tax-cut for the rich doesn't go well together. Etc, etc.

But for now, it's a coalition, and it has a story to tell: Fuck the others, we are going to eat the entire steak alone!

This project has broad support, but it's not a popular majority (as could be seen most recently in France), so disenfranchising voters, gerrymandering, demobilizing our opponent supporters so that the minority can win, is a bit part of the strategy.

Compare that to Scholz, Starmer, and even Biden. What's their story? I'm not as incompetent as the others, but they turn out to be as incompetent because they are unwilling to address their own contradictions.

Felix


[1] An excellent analysis of the contradiction in project 2025

https://prospect.org/politics/2024-07-10-project-2025-republican-presidencies-tradition/






























--
| |||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com |
| for secure communication, please use signal |
--
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org