"The effectiveness of the status strategy is increased by this analytical and operational nihilism."
Nietzsche saw this, way back when. It seems to me this is the ultimate endpoint of the Enlightenment - its own self destruction via nihilism. The question is what to salvage, what to junk and what to move onto next. The temptation is going to be to fall back on what worked before - but that won't do, as we are here because of what came before; and we are falling because of how it failed in the face of deep human behavior. The one bit of optimism I can muster is that the Romans didn't have the benefit of the template they are for us.
The importance of the coherent social pattern disrupted by the Great Society can't be overstated. Removal of real estate segregation allowed economically successful blacks to move to what had been lily white realms (which reinforced the economical segregation of poor whites). Now that mobility and social interaction was good, no question, but there was a cost. It left the abandoned black inner city with no informal social control or behavior modeling for success. Even progressives can't not-notice that, so they have to create ever more elaborate theory as to why that exists rather than to accept it as a consequence of what was more generally a good thing.
Can't help thinking - as I enjoy this wonderful, informed and erudite thesis - that it is totally wasted on those who would most benefit: the blinkered, 'progressive' wokerati whose ability to follow a logical train of thought is apparently disabled
Justice is giving to each what he has earned. Social justice is giving to each what another has earned. Social justice, then, is institutionalized injustice.
Another fine essay. I am always amazed at your marvelous hard hitting, on target, and zinger phrasings.
I have not yet gone back and read the whole set of essays in this series, so I may be speaking out of turn. But I respectfully wanted to raise a concern that if the eventual intent is to convert these essays into chapters in a book, then you and your "editorial team" should look closely for excessive repetition. There was a fair amount of that in this essay, and that works well for an essay that comes out about once a week, offering selective reinforcement of what has been said before. However, if or when incorporated into a book format, I fear seeing so many references to (say) the "transformational future" (or similar language about arc of history, disfunction, etc.) from the past chapter I read a half hour ago also emphasized again in the chapter I am currently reading. Certainly if you are building on a theme, some repetition to keep orienting the current discussion to that on-going and developing position is valid. Again, just a caution, or hopefully a constructive criticism. :-)
We all want your project to succeed, and it will be criticized by "the other side" no matter how tightly the language is presented. But there is no point in also providing ammunition for them, or even for the more sympathetic reviewers who still don't really "know what time it is!".
Kudos. Thanks. In 2020 the Democrats had three years to organize the Iowa caucuses (6 electoral votes.) To borrow your phrasing, they turned even that into crap.
Dec 10, 2023·edited Dec 11, 2023Liked by Lorenzo Warby
Reading this excellent essay as an American makes me want to don my digital hair shirt and apologize to all humanity for letting this academic virus escape our lab and infect the rest of the world.
Could there be anything more AMERICAN than the "transformational future" and its political and moral air castles? I used to think Social Justice was part Marxist and part Protestant (I still do) but I completely forgot to add Walt Disney and the American fantasy factory as an ideological godparent to the fever dream that's captured the Western world and addled its brains.
Really how far is it from “If You Can Dream It, You Can Do It” or "If You Wish Upon a Star..." to "I dream of a world where no one gets their feelings hurt and everyone's self-esteem is backed by the full force of the government"?
Social Justice is like spending a day at Disney World, coming out humming "It's a Small World After All" only to be locked inside Epcot Center and enforced to endure a Struggle Session conducted by angry clowns who sing songs about love and tolerance while zapping you with a cattle prod.
But Americans are like the world's richest teenagers who construct a fantasy world with Daddy's credit card, who imagine themselves moral paragons because they make sure to tip the gardener and valet parker, who really believe life should be nothing but joy and self-affirmation, and if it's not, there must be some malevolent entity that's conspiring against them (of course this malevolent entity is called "Reality" by the rest of us)—and like all rich grandiose teenagers, their fabulous fantasy life will only come to an end when the money runs out.
But you are partially missing the point about the left obsession with Palestine/Israel over other conflict as does the left. The important point is that various jewish lobbies are constantly interfering and with total success with the governments (American, British, French, probably many others) and democratic processes. This is especially choking concerning the Palestine/Israel conflict even if pushing special interests have far more important effects on our daily life in occident, except rare terrorist events, and short of a nuclear conflict. In France the assembly deputy Meyer Habib a close friend of Netanyahu, claims that Israel (really a terrorist state without even a constitution) is the only democratic country in the region and that its army is the most moral in the world and rudely shut up anyone who says otherwise. That does not happen so often because critics of Israel hardly have access to the French mass media. Except the very woke Melenchon. Also, about Meyer Habib, I think that a representative should not have a double nationality as he has.
Also in France, there is a constant chase of souverainists, labeled as far-right, but the Likud is hardly criticised which Meyer Habib defends. An idealist, Etienne Chouard, was diffamed and cancelled, because he wanted to discuss his pet project, citizen referendum, and not the jewish genocide in WII. He honestly said, he was not competent on the subject and did not come to discuss an about 80 years old genocide. He was immediately called and negationnist. Being defended by the Soral polemist was the next mark of infamy for him.
There's an apposite line in the Le Figaro newspaper this morning, here in France...
'Since the 19th century, the people have been seen as immature, violent, unpredictable and dangerous, which is why they first had to be "civilized", then educated and now re-educated.'
"The effectiveness of the status strategy is increased by this analytical and operational nihilism."
Nietzsche saw this, way back when. It seems to me this is the ultimate endpoint of the Enlightenment - its own self destruction via nihilism. The question is what to salvage, what to junk and what to move onto next. The temptation is going to be to fall back on what worked before - but that won't do, as we are here because of what came before; and we are falling because of how it failed in the face of deep human behavior. The one bit of optimism I can muster is that the Romans didn't have the benefit of the template they are for us.
The importance of the coherent social pattern disrupted by the Great Society can't be overstated. Removal of real estate segregation allowed economically successful blacks to move to what had been lily white realms (which reinforced the economical segregation of poor whites). Now that mobility and social interaction was good, no question, but there was a cost. It left the abandoned black inner city with no informal social control or behavior modeling for success. Even progressives can't not-notice that, so they have to create ever more elaborate theory as to why that exists rather than to accept it as a consequence of what was more generally a good thing.
Can't help thinking - as I enjoy this wonderful, informed and erudite thesis - that it is totally wasted on those who would most benefit: the blinkered, 'progressive' wokerati whose ability to follow a logical train of thought is apparently disabled
Justice is giving to each what he has earned. Social justice is giving to each what another has earned. Social justice, then, is institutionalized injustice.
I restocked this post, a great breakdown of progressive policy.
I quibble a bit with this though: As James Lindsay regularly points out, the process is literally alchemical.
Alchemy turns "lead" into "gold". Progressivism as you point out, turns "gold" into shit.
Another fine essay. I am always amazed at your marvelous hard hitting, on target, and zinger phrasings.
I have not yet gone back and read the whole set of essays in this series, so I may be speaking out of turn. But I respectfully wanted to raise a concern that if the eventual intent is to convert these essays into chapters in a book, then you and your "editorial team" should look closely for excessive repetition. There was a fair amount of that in this essay, and that works well for an essay that comes out about once a week, offering selective reinforcement of what has been said before. However, if or when incorporated into a book format, I fear seeing so many references to (say) the "transformational future" (or similar language about arc of history, disfunction, etc.) from the past chapter I read a half hour ago also emphasized again in the chapter I am currently reading. Certainly if you are building on a theme, some repetition to keep orienting the current discussion to that on-going and developing position is valid. Again, just a caution, or hopefully a constructive criticism. :-)
We all want your project to succeed, and it will be criticized by "the other side" no matter how tightly the language is presented. But there is no point in also providing ammunition for them, or even for the more sympathetic reviewers who still don't really "know what time it is!".
Great stuff as ever. Thanks.
But Pooh the Story is just so, nothing less and nothing more.
The problem is people notice things they’re not supposed to, those things are disinformation.
Kudos. Thanks. In 2020 the Democrats had three years to organize the Iowa caucuses (6 electoral votes.) To borrow your phrasing, they turned even that into crap.
Reading this excellent essay as an American makes me want to don my digital hair shirt and apologize to all humanity for letting this academic virus escape our lab and infect the rest of the world.
Could there be anything more AMERICAN than the "transformational future" and its political and moral air castles? I used to think Social Justice was part Marxist and part Protestant (I still do) but I completely forgot to add Walt Disney and the American fantasy factory as an ideological godparent to the fever dream that's captured the Western world and addled its brains.
Really how far is it from “If You Can Dream It, You Can Do It” or "If You Wish Upon a Star..." to "I dream of a world where no one gets their feelings hurt and everyone's self-esteem is backed by the full force of the government"?
Social Justice is like spending a day at Disney World, coming out humming "It's a Small World After All" only to be locked inside Epcot Center and enforced to endure a Struggle Session conducted by angry clowns who sing songs about love and tolerance while zapping you with a cattle prod.
But Americans are like the world's richest teenagers who construct a fantasy world with Daddy's credit card, who imagine themselves moral paragons because they make sure to tip the gardener and valet parker, who really believe life should be nothing but joy and self-affirmation, and if it's not, there must be some malevolent entity that's conspiring against them (of course this malevolent entity is called "Reality" by the rest of us)—and like all rich grandiose teenagers, their fabulous fantasy life will only come to an end when the money runs out.
Great post as always.
But you are partially missing the point about the left obsession with Palestine/Israel over other conflict as does the left. The important point is that various jewish lobbies are constantly interfering and with total success with the governments (American, British, French, probably many others) and democratic processes. This is especially choking concerning the Palestine/Israel conflict even if pushing special interests have far more important effects on our daily life in occident, except rare terrorist events, and short of a nuclear conflict. In France the assembly deputy Meyer Habib a close friend of Netanyahu, claims that Israel (really a terrorist state without even a constitution) is the only democratic country in the region and that its army is the most moral in the world and rudely shut up anyone who says otherwise. That does not happen so often because critics of Israel hardly have access to the French mass media. Except the very woke Melenchon. Also, about Meyer Habib, I think that a representative should not have a double nationality as he has.
Also in France, there is a constant chase of souverainists, labeled as far-right, but the Likud is hardly criticised which Meyer Habib defends. An idealist, Etienne Chouard, was diffamed and cancelled, because he wanted to discuss his pet project, citizen referendum, and not the jewish genocide in WII. He honestly said, he was not competent on the subject and did not come to discuss an about 80 years old genocide. He was immediately called and negationnist. Being defended by the Soral polemist was the next mark of infamy for him.
There's an apposite line in the Le Figaro newspaper this morning, here in France...
'Since the 19th century, the people have been seen as immature, violent, unpredictable and dangerous, which is why they first had to be "civilized", then educated and now re-educated.'
I get Lorenzo Warby and Warby Parker mixed up
The bureaucracy that has 2 people and 3 bots call and text me for one appointment is SUCCEEDING not Failing.
See it’s a Check $$