Authoritarianism is the hottest political product in the world right now. Western elites believe their governments must become more dictatorial in order to compete with technocratic despotisms like China. Public submission is the most desired commodity.
Perpetual states of emergency have replaced perpetual states of war as the preferred vehicle for increasing authoritarian power. In the old days, statists thought the hot ticket was using the language of military conflict to push social policy, i.e. "The War on Poverty."
Until recently, we were always "at war" with various ills. We were told to view ourselves as conscripts into these social wars, and politicians as our generals. They were always vowing to fight-fight-fight against social ills and shadowy conspiracies.
This impulse probably began as a desire to recreate the tremendous energy and unity of the World War 2 effort, but diverted into social causes and the expansion of the State. If we could win an all-out war against the Nazis, why not declare all-out war against social ills?
But now it's clear the Permanent State of Emergency is more politically profitable than forever war. People do expect "war" to end in victory, after all, and they grow less enthusiastic if the war grinds on forever. A good emergency can be kept rolling indefinitely.
Emergencies also encourage a more submissive mindset, which is essential for political power to grow. Obedience is the necessary fuel for power - giving orders is comical unless people obey them. Submission nourishes obedience.
There has also been a cultural shift over the past few generations that makes the perpetual emergency mindset an easier sell than perpetual war. Recruiting victims is much easier than enlisting soldiers.
But one way or the other, most Western political elites are devoted to making their populations more obedient, and walling off greater stores of power so the public cannot tamper with it. A growing number of issues are "settled" and are no longer up for discussion.
These elites see themselves as defenders of true freedom, not aspiring tyrants. They just believe a much larger portion of centralized power must be firewalled against public interference or disobedience - for their own good, of course, and just to cope with "emergencies."
The growing elite consensus is that democracy is too messy, unruly, and disobedient. People are prone to consuming misinformation and turning against their wise rulers. They can thwart the noble efforts of visionary politicians by voting them out of office. It's absurd!
The gentle meadow of freedom must be made smaller, and surrounded by higher fences that can only be built with authoritarian power. Within those fences, you'll be free enough. Only great leaders with humble people can master the challenges of the future.
The pandemic greatly increased the free world's appetite for "controlled" authoritarianism - a nuclear political fuel that must be handled carefully, but which is vital for reaching the technocratic future. The people can no longer be trusted to define the limits of power. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
