AuthorTopic: Pimping The Empire Progressive Style  (Read 1007 times)

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11504
    • View Profile
Pimping The Empire Progressive Style
« on: January 07, 2014, 08:20:22 AM »
Monday, January 06, 2014
Pimping the Empire, Progressive-Style

Supporting the central state to protect your favored cartels is simply pimping for the Empire.

The central illusion of both Left (so-called Progressives) and Right (so-called conservatives) is that the Central State's essentially unlimited powers can be narrowly directed to further their agenda.

(I say "so-called" because the "Progressives" are not actually progressive, and the "Conservatives" are not actually conservative. Those labels are Orwellian double-speak, designed to mask the disastrous consequences of each ideology's actual policies.)

Let's begin by stipulating that ideology, any ideology, is an intellectual and emotional shortcut that offers believers ready-made explanations, goals, narratives and enemies without any difficult, time-consuming analysis, study or skeptical inquiry. This is the ultimate appeal of ideology: accepting the ideology relieves the believer of the burdens of analysis, skeptical inquiry, uncertainty/doubt and responsibility: all the answers, goals and narratives are prepackaged and mashed together for easy consumption.

This is one of the core messages of Erich Fromm's classic exploration of ideology and authoritarianism, Escape from Freedom.

And what is the essential foundation of authoritarianism? A central state. This is not coincidental.

What few grasp is the teleology of the centralized state: by its very nature (i.e. as a consequence of its essentially unlimited powers), the central state is genetically programmed to become an authoritarian state devoted to self-preservation and the extension of its reach and power.

The central illusion of Progressives is that an all-powerful central state will not become a self-serving expansive empire, but will be content to wield its vast powers to protect its favored cartels/monopolies and distribute money skimmed from the citizenry to Progressive constituencies such as public unions, healthcare and education.

This is an absurd fantasy. Once you give a central state essentially unlimited power to stripmine income and wealth from its citizens, create and/or borrow essentially unlimited sums of money, protect private (and politically powerful) cartels from competition and project military, financial and diplomatic power around the globe, the state will pursue Authoritarianism and Empire as a consequence of possessing those powers.

You can't cede unlimited, highly concentrated powers to the central state and then expect the state not to fulfill its teleogical imperative to protect and extend its powers. The state with unlimited powers will be ontologically predisposed to view any citizen that seeks to limit its expansion of power as an enemy to be suppressed, imprisoned or marginalized.

The state with unlimited powers will be ontologically predisposed to protecting its powers by cloaking all the important inner workings of the state behind a veil of secrecy, and pursuing and punishing any whistleblowers who reveal the corrupt, self-serving workings of the state.

The state with unlimited powers will be ontologically predisposed to view any other nation or alliance as a potential threat, and thus the state will pursue any and all means to distrupt or counter those potential threats.

The state with unlimited powers will be ontologically predisposed to create and distribute propaganda to mask its self-serving nature and its perpetual agenda of extending its powers, lest some threat arise that limits those powers.

Democracy and a central state with unlimited powers are teleologically incompatible.

Progressives worship the central state and cede it essentially unlimited powers because they want that state to be powerful enough to impose their agenda on others and reward their constituencies.

But it doesn't work that way. Once you cede unlimited, highly concentrated power to the central state, you get an authoritarian empire that is driven to protect itself from any threat at all costs--including democracy, though the state may maintain a facade of carefully managed "democracy" as part of its propaganda machinery.

You cannot have a state with essentially unlimited power and not end up with cartel-capitalism. So-called Progressives defend their favored cartel-fiefdoms of healthcare and education (and the "conservative" banking and defense cartels, too, to insure banks fund their campaigns and to protect their political flank with a "strong on defense" carte blanche to the National Security cartels), yet these cartels are busy bankrupting the nation and destroying the very programs Progressives claim to hold dear.

You can't have it both ways, Progressives: if you support a central state with essentially unlimited power to protect and fund your constituent cartels, you end up with self-liquidating cartel-capitalism, a state bent on protecting itself from the uncertainties/risks of democracy and a global Empire that is teleologically driven to expand its reach and power by any and all means available.

Once you choose to cede essentially unlimited powers to the central state, all decisions after that are made in service of the state. The idea that the state can be limited to helping the needy is illusory.

The only legitimate duties of the state are limited: 1) protect the commons from destruction and exploitation; 2) protect the citizenry from exploitation or oppression by those with superior power or resources; 3) maintain transparency in all governance and 4) maintain a system of sound money.

The so-called Progressives will learn what the teleology of the state means in the real world when the state comes after them. Once you cede unlimited power to the central state, any attempt to limit that power marks you as an enemy.

War at Home: Covert action against U.S. activists.

Supporting the central state to protect your favored cartels and protect your political power over the state's tax revenues is simply pimping for the Empire. You can call it "progressive," but it's still pimping for the Empire.

http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/ :icon_study:

Offline Publius

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: Pimping The Empire Progressive Style
« Reply #1 on: January 07, 2014, 01:39:43 PM »
Great link and essay, Golden Oxen. I thought you had written it, but did recognize the Charles Hugh Smith style. He's definitely on the optimistic side of doomerism. Only status-quot believes see him as a downer!

He is such a clear writer, and clear thinker, that even if you think he is overly optimistic about the changes of a a nice post-collapse world, he is a must read.

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11504
    • View Profile
Re: Pimping The Empire Progressive Style
« Reply #2 on: January 07, 2014, 05:15:52 PM »
Great link and essay, Golden Oxen. I thought you had written it, but did recognize the Charles Hugh Smith style. He's definitely on the optimistic side of doomerism. Only status-quot believes see him as a downer!

He is such a clear writer, and clear thinker, that even if you think he is overly optimistic about the changes of a a nice post-collapse world, he is a must read.

Hi Publius Thanks for the compliment, I wish. :laugh:

CHS does put out some interesting stuff, my current views however are pretty much aligned with Mr. Kunstler.

Great to have you joining us as a regular poster.

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 12794
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Pimping The Empire Progressive Style
« Reply #3 on: January 07, 2014, 05:54:03 PM »
Hey, GO, thanks for the kind words during a brief sabbatical.

Read the CHS twice.

In re this
Quote
You can't have it both ways, Progressives: if you support a central state with essentially unlimited power to protect and fund your constituent cartels, you end up with self-liquidating cartel-capitalism, a state bent on protecting itself from the uncertainties/risks of democracy and a global Empire that is teleologically driven to expand its reach and power by any and all means available.

Once you choose to cede essentially unlimited powers to the central state, all decisions after that are made in service of the state. The idea that the state can be limited to helping the needy is illusory.

The only legitimate duties of the state are limited: 1) protect the commons from destruction and exploitation; 2) protect the citizenry from exploitation or oppression by those with superior power or resources; 3) maintain transparency in all governance and 4) maintain a system of sound money.

That seems pretty clear that what he advocates is a strict libertarian definition of the role of government. Yet what CHS asserts is not true; for decades, the role of the state WAS pretty successfully confined to "helping the needy" and promoting general welfare at least domestically, while the appetites of the national security state were whetted largely in secret and paid for via "black budgets."

Having lived through the 60s, I tend to push back against those who define what government cannot do, and who see every effort to claim some common interest as "statism." Jesus, I am tired of that meme. (That's a personal issue, and another story for another time, and another disagreement with yet another Occupier…)

As to this--
Quote
The so-called Progressives will learn what the teleology of the state means in the real world when the state comes after them. Once you cede unlimited power to the central state, any attempt to limit that power marks you as an enemy.

Did he miss this?


Did he miss this? (The image is my daughter, arrested when SWAT teams raided the Occupy Norfolk camp as part of the DHS-led national crackdown on Occupy)


Contrary and I will be out again this weekend as part of a rally to educate the public regarding Closing the Prison at Guantanomo Bay, Stopping the use of Torture, Stopping the indefinite detention clause of the NDAA and encouraging accountability for the use of drones against civilian populations. Quixotic? Maybe. But it ids what one does. CHS is a little late to b e talking about repression.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Golden Oxen

  • Golden Oxen
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11504
    • View Profile
Re: Pimping The Empire Progressive Style
« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2014, 06:09:41 PM »
I tend to agree with you Surly, the Libertarian view can certainly go much too far backwards and actually starts to sound rather silly.

My honest problem and current status as a Libertarian stems mostly from nit wit George Bush and that evil prick Dick Cheney to the current henchmen in power. Obama and Axelrod just turn my stomach. The last twenty or so years have just seemed to me to have given us a government totally out of control that has to be reigned in.

I know of no party that promises to do so but the Libertarian, but I fully submit to your view that they to are Far from the answer to our current dilemma. It's a bag with only three worms in it to me Surly, trying to pick the one less slimy currently is all I'm about. 

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
351 Views
Last post November 01, 2016, 08:16:01 PM
by Palloy
0 Replies
229 Views
Last post March 02, 2017, 04:42:38 AM
by knarf
1 Replies
328 Views
Last post October 26, 2017, 07:53:07 AM
by Eddie