From ‘Mencius Moldbug‘:
Since the reality of political history is that all polities of nontrivial size are controlled by organized minorities, all nontrivial democracies are pseudo-democracies. They are all different, however, since every organized minority is different. Every government flavored with democracy is irredeemably foul, but broadly the 20th-century pseudo-democratic regimes can be separated into two broad categories: oligarchical (communist, impersonal) and despotic (fascist, personal). Your preference depends on whether you prefer to be ruled by an omnipotent politician or a faceless machine. There is no difficulty in classifying the USG, or any other major modern government – they are all oligarchies.
So are we truly guilty? Perhaps this is an out – it is not us, but our rulers, who have committed these terrible collaborations. And by them conquered, of course, the world. Leading inexorably to our present national position of “global leadership,” not at all to be confused with “world domination.”
The question of whether the voting community is an active participant, or a passive part, in this machine, is an empirical one. It is of course much easier for the community to be an active participant in a fascist regime where individual politicians take actual power as a consequence of their personal support – although once they attain that power, they can build the usual apparatus to “manufacture consent.” Thus in a sense fascism is the more democratic form, but only in a sense.
In an oligarchical regime, public opinion is always an effect rather than a cause. It still matters, but only in the sense that some effects cannot be caused. But the power of the machine is always increasing. Few in the Reagan era could have imagined that in the lives of their grown children, most Americans would come to regard gay marriage as an essential civil right. Why did this happen? Because the ruling class is sovereign not just politically, but also intellectually. What it believes, everyone comes to believe – and is horrified that previous generations somehow failed to believe.
For those not familiar with Moldbug’s essays, a good index is here.
7 Comments
Malcolm, you may recall your words (then again you may not) however from sometime back in describing one of “our culture’s Oracles” you put it thusly:
“… the greatest writer of the last several centuries.”?
As I recall some hilarity on the thread ensued.
Anyway I just read an NRO piece which opening sentence, in my opinion, promises to give you a good run for the money.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/ta-nehisi-coates-kanye-west-hate-eloquent/
I like these sorts of composition.
JK – I do remember that, and yes, I saw that Tennessee Coates is at it again. (“Haters”, as they say, “gonna hate.”)
The dog barks, the caravan passes.
Okay, but what does Goldbug actually believe in then? He says that democracy is always “foul”. Fine, but then what was – and is – the alternative? Those who like Goldbug cannot posit a realistic alternative here are just indulging in cheap gnostic moralizing.
Jason,
Moldbug has suggested a very detailed alternative that he calls ‘neocameralism’: in short, government organized as a joint-stock corporation.
But even if he hadn’t, his writing would be valuable simply for breaking the grip that democracy has on the modern Western mind. (After all, how many people, in 2018, are likely to read Henry Sumner Maine, or Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn?)
There are a great many very good reasons to look upon democracy with withering skepticism — but as Moldbug says elsewhere, “disbelieving in democracy in 2008 is a lot like disbelieving in God in 1758.” He does the inquiring reader, therefore, a service by inviting him to try to see our cult of Democracy in a more critical light.
https://voegelinview.com/rise-reactionary-part-ii/
traxus,
Opinions do vary.
P.S. Sorry if my response seemed rather ho-hum, traxus, but that really isn’t a strong enough critique to say much more about it: too many straw men, too little actual engagement or rebuttal, too much pointing and sputtering.
Above all, the writing isn’t good. I can get past a sentence-fragment or ten, but it was very difficult indeed to press on after this, for example:
Thanks anyway.